Wed, Nov 23, 2016·Gila River Arena, Glendale
Vancouver Canucks 4, Arizona Coyotes 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Arizona Coyotes win this game 56% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VAN | 111 | 310 | 06 | 427 |
| ARI | 017 | 112 | 07 | 136 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:08VANSven BaertschiAssists: Bo Horvat · Wrist, 0.14 xG1–0
- P2 0:58ARIChristian DvorakAssists: Tony DeAngelo, Alex Goligoski · Tip-in, 0.12 xG1–1
- P2 3:18VANLoui ErikssonGWGAssists: Markus Granlund, Luca Sbisa · Wrist, 0.14 xG2–1
- P2 3:35VANBo HorvatAssists: Alexandre Burrows, Sven Baertschi · Wrist, 0.20 xG3–1
- P2 6:49VANAlexandre BurrowsAssists: Sven Baertschi, Bo Horvat · Wrist, 0.03 xG4–1
Penalties (4)
- P1 11:59ARILawson Crouse: Slashing2 min
- P1 18:11VANAlexandre Burrows: Tripping2 min
- P2 10:19ARIMax Domi: Hooking2 min
- P2 13:47VANBo Horvat: Hooking2 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 20:00Hanzal won the faceoff against Sutter
- 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.
Vancouver Canucks
Forward lines
- bestBurrows – Baertschi – Horvat11:47
xG 0.58–0.26 (69%)attempts 9–13goals 3–0
- Eriksson – Chaput – Granlund11:08
xG 0.58–0.48 (55%)attempts 12–11goals 1–1
- LaBate – Gaunce – Megna4:55
xG 0.02–0.13 (16%)attempts 1–3goals 0–0
- Sedin – Sedin – Sutter14:35
xG 0.13–0.97 (12%)attempts 7–20goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestEdler – Stecher14:57
xG 0.55–0.41 (57%)attempts 9–18goals 1–1
- Gudbranson – Hutton19:21
xG 0.59–0.89 (40%)attempts 12–20goals 1–0
- Sbisa – Tryamkin14:51
xG 0.64–0.95 (40%)attempts 14–23goals 2–0
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestMcGinn – Duclair – Dvorak7:20
xG 0.51–0.22 (69%)attempts 13–7goals 1–1
- McGinn – White – Martinook2:37
xG 0.25–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–0goals 0–0
- White – Dauphin – Crouse3:56
xG 0.15–0.03 (82%)attempts 7–1goals 0–0
- Duclair – Domi – Dvorak4:27
xG 0.21–0.11 (65%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestEkman-Larsson – Murphy19:11
xG 0.93–0.29 (76%)attempts 22–9goals 0–1
- Goligoski – Stone2:26
xG 0.22–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Stone – Connauton10:39
xG 0.27–0.30 (48%)attempts 13–8goals 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.
ARI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ARI is favoured, below it VAN. 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, Arizona Coyotes win this game 56% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ARI − VAN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).