Wed, Jan 4, 2017·Honda Center, Anaheim
Detroit Red Wings 0, Anaheim Ducks 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 74% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DET | 06 | 08 | 09 | 023 |
| ANA | 110 | 09 | 15 | 224 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 13:54ANANick RitchieGWGAssists: Antoine Vermette, Ondrej Kase · Wrist, 0.24 xG0–1
- P3 17:06ANAOndrej KaseAssists: Antoine Vermette, Kevin Bieksa · Backhand, 0.09 xG0–2
Penalties (9)
- P1 14:52DETXavier Ouellet: Tripping2 min
- P1 18:16DETBrendan Smith: Tripping2 min
- P1 18:16ANARyan Kesler: Interference2 min
- P2 14:44ANACam Fowler: Interference2 min
- P3 7:59ANANick Ritchie: High sticking2 min
- P3 8:48DETSteve Ott: Interference goalkeeper2 min
- P3 11:16DETHenrik Zetterberg: Tripping2 min
- P3 14:35ANAHampus Lindholm: Tripping2 min
- P3 19:18DETXavier Ouellet: High sticking2 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 20:00Zetterberg won the faceoff against Kesler
- 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.
Detroit Red Wings
Forward lines
- bestJurco – Glendening – Larkin7:13
xG 0.31–0.19 (62%)attempts 10–4goals 0–0
- Zetterberg – Nyquist – Mantha3:03
xG 0.10–0.03 (74%)attempts 1–2goals 0–0
- Nielsen – Vanek – Jurco2:18
xG 0.13–0.15 (47%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Zetterberg – Tatar – Mantha8:38
xG 0.11–0.26 (30%)attempts 6–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Ouellet – DeKeyser2:43
xG 0.01–0.06 (19%)attempts 1–3goals 0–0
- Ericsson – Jensen4:24
xG 0.24–0.30 (44%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Kronwall – Smith8:46
xG 0.31–0.42 (43%)attempts 8–9goals 0–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestVermette – Ritchie – Kase9:40
xG 1.13–0.23 (83%)attempts 14–9goals 2–0
- Perry – Cramarossa – Rakell8:56
xG 0.56–0.23 (71%)attempts 8–10goals 0–0
- Kesler – Cogliano – Silfverberg13:26
xG 0.49–0.24 (67%)attempts 13–9goals 0–0
- Boll – Wagner – Shaw4:32
xG 0.22–0.06 (78%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestManson – Lindholm10:35
xG 0.99–0.21 (82%)attempts 14–10goals 0–0
- Vatanen – Fowler12:52
xG 0.58–0.16 (78%)attempts 12–6goals 0–0
- Bieksa – Fowler4:13
xG 0.21–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–3goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it DET. 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 74% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − DET), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).