Wed, Mar 1, 2017·United Center, Chicago
Pittsburgh Penguins 1, Chicago Blackhawks 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 59% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIT | 07 | 117 | 013 | 137 |
| CHI | 09 | 214 | 26 | 429 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 8:49CHIPatrick KaneAssists: Nick Schmaltz · Wrist, 0.04 xG0–1
- P2 17:00PITScott WilsonAssists: Ron Hainsey · Slap, 0.23 xG1–1
- P2 19:36CHIRichard PanikGWGAssists: Duncan Keith · Wrist, 0.09 xG1–2
- P3 16:52CHIPatrick KaneAssists: Nick Schmaltz, Artemi Panarin · Snap, 0.16 xG1–3
- P3 19:19CHIPatrick KaneENUnassisted · Backhand, 0.68 xG1–4
Penalties (1)
- P1 14:44PITJustin Schultz: Tripping2 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 20:00Crosby won the faceoff against Toews
- 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.
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestCullen – Crosby – Kessel3:30
xG 0.83–0.08 (91%)attempts 11–2goals 0–0
- Malkin – Hornqvist – Hagelin14:34
xG 0.91–0.49 (65%)attempts 19–9goals 0–2
- Kuhnhackl – Wilson – Rowney6:22
xG 0.41–0.05 (88%)attempts 6–6goals 1–0
- Cullen – Kessel – Bonino10:27
xG 0.19–0.16 (55%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHainsey – Dumoulin15:53
xG 0.78–0.09 (89%)attempts 12–10goals 1–0
- Pouliot – Ruhwedel11:45
xG 0.68–0.17 (80%)attempts 14–7goals 0–0
- Dumoulin – Ruhwedel3:02
xG 0.17–0.02 (90%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestToews – Panik – Hartman7:50
xG 1.24–0.11 (92%)attempts 12–6goals 1–0
- Hossa – Hartman – Kero4:52
xG 0.21–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Toews – Panik – Schmaltz6:08
xG 0.38–0.28 (58%)attempts 10–7goals 0–0
- Kane – Kruger – Rasmussen2:40
xG 0.05–0.02 (74%)attempts 1–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKeith – Seabrook19:48
xG 1.72–1.01 (63%)attempts 24–26goals 2–0
- Rozsival – Kempny11:55
xG 0.34–0.53 (39%)attempts 11–8goals 0–1
- Campbell – van Riemsdyk17:32
xG 0.51–1.64 (24%)attempts 12–21goals 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 PIT. 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, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 59% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − PIT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).