Sun, Apr 2, 2017·PPG Paints Arena, Pittsburgh
Carolina Hurricanes 2, Pittsburgh Penguins 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 52% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAR | 111 | 011 | 113 | 235 |
| PIT | 19 | 112 | 15 | 326 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 11:28PITJake GuentzelPPAssists: Chad Ruhwedel, Nick Bonino · Wrist, 0.15 xG0–1
- P1 13:21CARJeff SkinnerAssists: Elias Lindholm, Lucas Wallmark · Wrist, 0.34 xG1–1
- P2 7:50PITScott WilsonAssists: Carter Rowney · Backhand, 0.08 xG1–2
- P3 5:07PITConor ShearyPPGWGAssists: Patric Hornqvist, Phil Kessel · Wrist, 0.12 xG1–3
- P3 9:38CARJustin FaulkPPAssists: Sebastian Aho, Elias Lindholm · Wrist, 0.48 xG2–3
Penalties (4)
- P1 9:40CARKlas Dahlbeck: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P3 4:31CARLee Stempniak: Too many men on the ice2 min · PPG
- P3 8:57PITMatt Cullen: High sticking double minor4 min · PPG
- P3 13:12PITIan Cole: 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 20:00Staal won the faceoff against Crosby
- 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.
Carolina Hurricanes
Forward lines
- bestSkinner – Lindholm – Wallmark13:09
xG 1.00–0.44 (69%)attempts 17–9goals 1–0
- Staal – Teravainen – Aho13:33
xG 0.53–0.38 (58%)attempts 20–9goals 0–0
- Stempniak – McGinn – Ryan5:17
xG 0.05–0.39 (11%)attempts 2–8goals 0–0
- Nordstrom – Rask – Di Giuseppe7:44
xG 0.17–0.62 (22%)attempts 6–8goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestSlavin – Pesce17:14
xG 1.12–0.60 (65%)attempts 25–16goals 1–0
- Faulk – Slavin2:17
xG 0.00–0.10 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
- Faulk – Hanifin17:34
xG 0.37–0.51 (42%)attempts 14–11goals 0–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestWilson – Archibald – Rowney8:08
xG 0.70–0.08 (89%)attempts 6–7goals 1–0
- Crosby – Guentzel – Sheary14:20
xG 0.95–0.83 (53%)attempts 19–16goals 0–1
- Cullen – Hornqvist – Kuhnhackl8:34
xG 0.40–0.44 (48%)attempts 9–9goals 0–0
- Kessel – Bonino – Rust10:47
xG 0.08–0.38 (17%)attempts 3–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHainsey – Dumoulin16:06
xG 1.06–0.49 (68%)attempts 15–21goals 1–0
- Streit – Ruhwedel9:19
xG 0.42–0.17 (72%)attempts 8–6goals 0–0
- Cole – Ruhwedel2:05
xG 0.02–0.08 (19%)attempts 1–5goals 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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it CAR. 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 52% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − CAR), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).