Wed, Nov 9, 2016·Nationwide Arena, Columbus
Anaheim Ducks 2, Columbus Blue Jackets 3 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 77% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 09 | 115 | 17 | 01 | 232 |
| CBJ | 27 | 05 | 05 | 11 | 318 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 1:23CBJBoone JennerAssists: Scott Hartnell, Cam Atkinson · Snap, 0.35 xG0–1
- P1 5:29CBJBrandon SaadAssists: Ryan Murray, Jack Johnson · Snap, 0.02 xG0–2
- P2 17:21ANARickard RakellAssists: Cam Fowler, Josh Manson · Tip-in, 0.08 xG1–2
- P3 1:25ANANick RitchieAssists: Joseph Cramarossa · Wrap-around, 0.11 xG2–2
- OT 1:21CBJZach WerenskiGWGAssists: Alexander Wennberg, Brandon Saad · Wrist, 0.07 xG2–3
Penalties (6)
- P1 9:35ANARyan Garbutt: Slashing2 min
- P1 16:14CBJMatt Calvert: Slashing2 min
- P2 2:07ANARyan Garbutt: Slashing2 min
- P2 7:11ANAChris Wagner: High sticking2 min
- P2 12:16CBJMatt Calvert: Slashing2 min
- P2 18:36CBJMatt Calvert: Roughing2 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 Wennberg
- 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 – Cramarossa – Ritchie4:42
xG 0.21–0.02 (91%)attempts 3–2goals 1–0
- Getzlaf – Perry – Ritchie7:41
xG 0.17–0.01 (93%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
- Vermette – Cramarossa – Rakell5:16
xG 0.14–0.07 (66%)attempts 4–5goals 1–0
- Getzlaf – Perry – Rakell4:57
xG 0.08–0.07 (56%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestFowler – Manson14:43
xG 0.33–0.24 (58%)attempts 8–9goals 2–0
- Bieksa – Lindholm14:45
xG 0.22–0.14 (61%)attempts 10–13goals 0–0
- Stoner – Vatanen12:39
xG 0.59–0.52 (54%)attempts 18–5goals 0–1
Columbus Blue Jackets
Forward lines
- bestHartnell – Atkinson – Jenner4:03
xG 0.50–0.17 (74%)attempts 6–4goals 1–0
- Gagner – Sedlak – Milano3:45
xG 0.05–0.08 (38%)attempts 3–2goals 0–1
- Calvert – Karlsson – Anderson13:07
xG 0.12–0.17 (41%)attempts 9–9goals 0–0
- Atkinson – Jenner – Milano3:00
xG 0.07–0.29 (18%)attempts 1–4goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestProut – Nutivaara11:02
xG 0.59–0.39 (60%)attempts 6–11goals 1–0
- Savard – Werenski16:07
xG 0.23–0.13 (64%)attempts 14–5goals 0–1
- Johnson – Murray16:18
xG 0.13–0.62 (18%)attempts 9–18goals 1–1
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.
CBJ's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CBJ 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 77% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CBJ − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).