Thu, Dec 1, 2016·United Center, Chicago
New Jersey Devils 3, Chicago Blackhawks 4 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, New Jersey Devils win this game 56% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NJD | 113 | 18 | 112 | 00 | 333 |
| CHI | 09 | 315 | 08 | 11 | 433 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:13NJDTravis ZajacAssists: Kyle Palmieri, Damon Severson · Wrist, 0.12 xG1–0
- P2 1:02CHIMarcus KrugerAssists: Dennis Rasmussen, Brent Seabrook · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–1
- P2 10:43NJDTravis ZajacPPAssists: Kyle Palmieri · Wrist, 0.25 xG2–1
- P2 12:25CHIArtem AnisimovAssists: Duncan Keith, Brent Seabrook · Backhand, 0.34 xG2–2
- P2 18:25CHINiklas HjalmarssonUnassisted · Wrist, 0.03 xG2–3
- P3 8:49NJDTravis ZajacAssists: Michael Cammalleri · Wrist, 0.06 xG3–3
- OT 1:31CHIMarian HossaGWGAssists: Patrick Kane, Duncan Keith · Wrist, 0.07 xG3–4
Penalties (6)
- P1 6:30NJDMiles Wood: High sticking2 min
- P1 10:41CHIMichal Kempny: Tripping2 min
- P1 13:47NJDNick Lappin: Hooking2 min
- P2 2:38NJDBen Lovejoy: Slashing2 min
- P2 10:09CHIArtem Anisimov: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P2 15:51NJDJohn Quenneville: Boarding2 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 20:00Zajac won the faceoff against Anisimov
- 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.
New Jersey Devils
Forward lines
- bestCammalleri – Zajac – Palmieri9:46
xG 1.03–0.40 (72%)attempts 12–12goals 2–0
- Parenteau – Henrique – Hall8:43
xG 0.53–0.27 (66%)attempts 10–8goals 0–2
- Fiddler – Wood – Lappin6:43
xG 0.30–0.28 (52%)attempts 7–5goals 0–0
- Smith-Pelly – Quenneville – Zacha6:13
xG 0.24–0.50 (32%)attempts 6–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMoore – Severson4:04
xG 0.23–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
- Quincey – Moore10:53
xG 0.53–0.36 (60%)attempts 8–12goals 0–2
- Lovejoy – Moore2:52
xG 0.15–0.05 (74%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- Panik – Kruger – Rasmussen9:29
xG 0.38–0.36 (51%)attempts 11–7goals 1–0
- Anisimov – Kane – Panarin12:01
xG 0.99–1.03 (49%)attempts 14–10goals 1–1
- Hossa – Hinostroza – Hartman9:56
xG 0.48–0.54 (47%)attempts 11–11goals 0–1
- Desjardins – Motte – Schmaltz6:39
xG 0.28–0.55 (33%)attempts 6–14goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Keith – Hjalmarsson15:38
xG 0.96–1.07 (47%)attempts 16–13goals 1–2
- Rozsival – Kempny10:51
xG 0.32–0.50 (39%)attempts 6–15goals 0–0
- Campbell – Seabrook14:44
xG 0.74–0.96 (44%)attempts 16–16goals 1–0
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.
CHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CHI is favoured, below it NJD. 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, New Jersey Devils win this game 56% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − NJD), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).