Skip to content
Ice Lab

Fri, Dec 30, 2016·SAP Center at San Jose, San Jose

Philadelphia Flyers 0, San Jose Sharks 2

Expected result

Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 87% of the time.

SJS winsPHI wins

By period

Goals and shots on goal in each period.

TeamP1P2P3Total
PHI070707021
SJS11209113234

Goals, with shots on goal in grey.

Scoring

Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.

  1. P1 16:29SJSPatrick MarleauPPGWGAssists: Kevin Labanc, Marc-Edouard Vlasic · Wrist, 0.52 xG0–1
  2. P3 15:23SJSJustin BraunAssists: Joe Pavelski, Patrick Marleau · Wrist, 0.09 xG0–2
Penalties (5)
  1. P1 5:23PHINick Schultz: Tripping2 min
  2. P1 14:53PHIIvan Provorov: Tripping2 min · PPG
  3. P1 18:10SJSBrent Burns: Tripping2 min
  4. P2 8:03SJSKevin Labanc: Hooking2 min
  5. P2 11:32PHIAndrew MacDonald: Holding2 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.

PHI00 SOG · 0.0 xG

20:00

P1

0.0 xG · 0 SOG0SJS
44% to win56% to win
← PHI attackSJS attack →
  1. P1 20:00Schenn won the faceoff against Thornton
  • Goal
  • Shot
  • Miss
  • Block
  • Hit
  • Takeaway
  • Giveaway
  • Faceoff
  • Penalty

The numbers

Team totals, side by side.

PHISJS
21Shots on goal34
1.4Expected goals3.7
49Shot attempts55
29Faceoffs won29
2Power plays3
6Penalty minutes4
22Hits11
11Blocked shots18
14Giveaways17
2Takeaways11

Line combinations that worked

Model-based

Each team's forward lines and defence pairs at 5-on-5 (two minutes or more together), best first by expected goals for minus against.

Philadelphia Flyers

Forward lines

  1. Gordon – VandeVelde – Bellemare5:32

    xG 0.05–0.15 (24%)attempts 2–6goals 0–0

  2. Weise – Cousins – Couturier10:44

    xG 0.25–0.36 (41%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0

  3. Simmonds – Schenn – Leier8:57

    xG 0.05–0.36 (13%)attempts 1–6goals 0–0

  4. Giroux – Voracek – Raffl15:30

    xG 0.30–1.13 (21%)attempts 13–19goals 0–1

Defence pairs

  1. Del Zotto – Gostisbehere2:00

    xG 0.07–0.07 (49%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0

  2. Del Zotto – Manning13:02

    xG 0.20–0.59 (25%)attempts 8–14goals 0–0

  3. MacDonald – Provorov15:30

    xG 0.39–1.03 (27%)attempts 16–7goals 0–1

San Jose Sharks

Forward lines

  1. bestThornton – Marleau – Pavelski12:21

    xG 1.12–0.18 (86%)attempts 16–8goals 1–0

  2. Couture – Boedker – Labanc9:37

    xG 0.79–0.17 (82%)attempts 10–7goals 0–0

  3. Ward – Haley – Karlsson7:58

    xG 0.44–0.15 (74%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0

  4. Donskoi – Tierney – Meier10:47

    xG 0.50–0.27 (65%)attempts 11–8goals 0–0

Defence pairs

  1. bestMartin – Burns14:58

    xG 1.12–0.12 (90%)attempts 16–8goals 0–0

  2. Vlasic – Braun16:19

    xG 0.97–0.36 (73%)attempts 16–14goals 1–0

  3. Schlemko – Dillon12:31

    xG 0.48–0.15 (76%)attempts 10–9goals 0–0

How the game flowed

Model-based

Chance quality for each side, minute by minute, with pressure underneath.

Expected goals flow

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.

SJS 3.7 xGPHI 1.4 xG
01234P1P2P3EndxG

Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute

SJSPHI

Win probability

Model-based

How each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.

Win probability

SJS's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line SJS is favoured, below it PHI. Dots are goals.

Excitement 0/100 · #1222 of 1230 this seasonSwing 0.56 · 2 goals in reachComeback index 55% (winner's lowest chance)
PHI 100%5050%50SJS 100%P1P2P3EndBiggest swing +18 pts

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 87% of the time.

SJS winsPHI wins

Simulated goal difference (SJS − PHI), 10,000 replays

-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
+1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7

The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).