Thu, Dec 22, 2016·Canadian Tire Centre, Ottawa
Anaheim Ducks 1, Ottawa Senators 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 73% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 06 | 19 | 09 | 01 | 125 |
| OTT | 05 | 17 | 05 | 11 | 218 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 1:02OTTRyan DzingelAssists: Kyle Turris · Snap, 0.10 xG0–1
- P2 19:50ANAJakob SilfverbergPPAssists: Corey Perry, Antoine Vermette · Snap, 0.14 xG1–1
- OT 4:03OTTMike HoffmanPPGWGAssists: Dion Phaneuf · Snap, 0.06 xG1–2
Penalties (9)
- P1 4:50ANAJared Boll: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P1 4:50OTTMark Borowiecki: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P1 9:03OTTMark Borowiecki: Fighting5 min
- P1 9:03ANAJared Boll: Fighting5 min
- P1 9:52OTTDion Phaneuf: Slashing2 min
- P2 2:47ANAKevin Bieksa: Tripping2 min
- P2 19:07OTTMark Stone: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P3 5:09OTTBobby Ryan: High sticking double minor4 min
- OT 3:23ANAAndrew Cogliano: High sticking2 min · PPG
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 20:00Brassard won the faceoff against Getzlaf
- 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
- bestGetzlaf – Perry – Rakell6:19
xG 0.27–0.02 (93%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
- Getzlaf – Perry – Ritchie5:54
xG 0.22–0.05 (80%)attempts 7–2goals 0–0
- Vermette – Rakell – Kase4:04
xG 0.11–0.01 (91%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
- Vermette – Ritchie – Kase3:37
xG 0.14–0.06 (69%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBieksa – Theodore14:16
xG 0.63–0.09 (87%)attempts 14–10goals 0–0
- Manson – Lindholm14:04
xG 0.47–0.21 (69%)attempts 11–5goals 0–1
- Vatanen – Fowler14:38
xG 0.25–0.16 (60%)attempts 11–7goals 0–0
Ottawa Senators
Forward lines
- bestRyan – Turris – Dzingel13:12
xG 0.23–0.14 (62%)attempts 10–13goals 1–0
- Pyatt – Hoffman – Pageau6:30
xG 0.18–0.11 (63%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
- Brassard – Smith – Stone5:54
xG 0.04–0.14 (24%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
- Neil – Kelly – Lazar5:48
xG 0.03–0.16 (17%)attempts 1–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBorowiecki – Wideman7:36
xG 0.31–0.00 (100%)attempts 9–1goals 0–0
- Borowiecki – Ceci2:05
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 0–0goals 0–0
- Methot – Karlsson16:15
xG 0.11–0.49 (19%)attempts 7–17goals 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.
OTT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line OTT 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 73% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (OTT − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).