Tue, Oct 25, 2016·SAP Center at San Jose, San Jose
Anaheim Ducks 1, San Jose Sharks 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 75% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 09 | 15 | 06 | 00 | 120 |
| SJS | 111 | 015 | 09 | 11 | 236 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 7:58SJSJoe PavelskiPPAssists: Patrick Marleau, Joonas Donskoi · Slap, 0.57 xG0–1
- P2 17:49ANAChris WagnerAssists: Clayton Stoner, Antoine Vermette · Backhand, 0.23 xG1–1
- OT 1:24SJSMarc-Edouard VlasicGWGAssists: Joe Pavelski · Wrist, 0.19 xG1–2
Penalties (11)
- P1 1:52ANAShea Theodore: Hooking2 min
- P1 6:32ANARyan Garbutt: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P1 9:25ANAClayton Stoner: Fighting5 min
- P1 9:25SJSMicheal Haley: Instigator2 min
- P1 9:25SJSMicheal Haley: Fighting5 min
- P1 9:25SJSMicheal Haley: Misconduct10 min
- P1 10:49SJSTomas Hertl: Delaying game face off violation2 min
- P2 1:56ANAKevin Bieksa: Interference2 min
- P3 4:09SJSJoe Thornton: Holding the stick2 min
- P3 8:22ANARyan Kesler: High sticking2 min
- P3 14:55ANANick Ritchie: Too many men on the ice2 min
Replay
Watch the game unfold on the ice: every shot, hit, turnover and faceoff appears as it happened, then fades. Drag the timeline to jump; goals are marked on it.
20:00
P1
- P1 20:00Getzlaf won the faceoff against Thornton
- Goal
- Shot
- Miss
- Block
- Hit
- Takeaway
- Giveaway
- Faceoff
- Penalty
The numbers
Team totals, side by side.
Line combinations that worked
Model-basedEach team's forward lines and defence pairs at 5-on-5 (two minutes or more together), best first by expected goals for minus against.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestVermette – Wagner – Garbutt3:46
xG 0.37–0.17 (68%)attempts 5–7goals 1–0
- Vermette – Perry – Ritchie3:51
xG 0.01–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Boll – Sgarbossa – Cramarossa5:12
xG 0.08–0.23 (25%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Getzlaf – Perry – Ritchie6:25
xG 0.03–0.23 (10%)attempts 2–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Stoner – Vatanen13:22
xG 0.53–0.58 (48%)attempts 16–14goals 1–0
- Bieksa – Fowler2:28
xG 0.00–0.09 (0%)attempts 0–2goals 0–0
- Fowler – Manson12:52
xG 0.18–0.30 (38%)attempts 4–15goals 0–0
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestHaley – Wingels – Tierney4:18
xG 0.39–0.02 (95%)attempts 5–4goals 0–0
- Thornton – Pavelski – Boedker11:59
xG 0.31–0.18 (63%)attempts 11–6goals 0–0
- Marleau – Hertl – Karlsson11:17
xG 0.09–0.24 (27%)attempts 10–12goals 0–0
- Ward – Couture – Donskoi10:23
xG 0.17–0.37 (32%)attempts 11–6goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestSchlemko – Dillon10:17
xG 0.33–0.04 (88%)attempts 11–3goals 0–0
- Martin – Burns16:46
xG 0.89–0.73 (55%)attempts 22–12goals 0–1
- Vlasic – Braun13:21
xG 0.22–0.14 (62%)attempts 7–14goals 0–0
How the game flowed
Model-basedChance quality for each side, minute by minute, with pressure underneath.
Running total of expected goals for each team. Steep climbs are spells of pressure; dots are goals. Shaded bands mark power plays (team colour), 4-on-4 or 3-on-3 (grey) and empty nets.
Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute
Win probability
Model-basedHow each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.
SJS's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line SJS is favoured, below it ANA. Dots are goals.
Did the better team win?
Every shot replayed 10,000 times, scoring with its expected-goal probability.
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 75% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (SJS − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).