Sat, Apr 1, 2017·Amalie Arena, Tampa
Montréal Canadiens 2, Tampa Bay Lightning 1 (OT)
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Montréal Canadiens win this game 68% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MTL | 07 | 117 | 09 | 13 | 236 |
| TBL | 07 | 06 | 19 | 00 | 122 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 14:24MTLPhillip DanaultAssists: Max Pacioretty · Backhand, 0.10 xG1–0
- P3 11:38TBLYanni GourdeAssists: Victor Hedman, Jonathan Drouin · Tip-in, 0.05 xG1–1
- OT 0:51MTLAlexander RadulovGWGAssists: Max Pacioretty, Phillip Danault · Wrist, 0.09 xG2–1
Penalties (4)
- P2 2:34TBLAlex Killorn: High sticking2 min
- P2 5:57MTLDwight King: Holding2 min
- P2 15:02TBLGreg McKegg: Illegal check to head2 min
- P2 18:14MTLBrandon Davidson: Hooking2 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 20:00Plekanec won the faceoff against Gourde
- 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.
Montréal Canadiens
Forward lines
- bestPlekanec – Byron – Gallagher11:04
xG 0.72–0.17 (81%)attempts 15–6goals 0–0
- Shaw – Galchenyuk – Lehkonen10:48
xG 0.54–0.17 (76%)attempts 13–7goals 0–0
- Radulov – Pacioretty – Danault12:48
xG 0.26–0.45 (37%)attempts 10–12goals 1–1
- King – McCarron – Martinsen10:46
xG 0.28–0.50 (36%)attempts 8–13goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMarkov – Weber16:14
xG 0.88–0.35 (71%)attempts 19–15goals 0–0
- Emelin – Beaulieu15:11
xG 0.55–0.15 (78%)attempts 14–6goals 1–0
- Emelin – Petry2:43
xG 0.07–0.06 (51%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestPalat – Kucherov – Point16:32
xG 0.68–0.43 (61%)attempts 23–11goals 0–1
- Dumont – McKegg – Brown7:27
xG 0.11–0.23 (33%)attempts 3–8goals 0–0
- Killorn – Namestnikov – Drouin9:43
xG 0.26–0.68 (28%)attempts 7–12goals 0–0
- Gourde – Vermin – Erne8:57
xG 0.06–0.52 (10%)attempts 4–14goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHedman – Dotchin15:29
xG 0.65–0.41 (62%)attempts 22–10goals 1–1
- Hedman – Sustr3:32
xG 0.13–0.07 (66%)attempts 5–4goals 0–0
- Witkowski – Hedman3:07
xG 0.01–0.08 (15%)attempts 1–6goals 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.
TBL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line TBL is favoured, below it MTL. 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, Montréal Canadiens win this game 68% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (TBL − MTL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).