Thu, Apr 6, 2017·Honda Center, Anaheim
Chicago Blackhawks 0, Anaheim Ducks 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 52% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | 09 | 018 | 010 | 037 |
| ANA | 18 | 110 | 28 | 426 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 6:53ANACorey PerryPPGWGAssists: Rickard Rakell, Sami Vatanen · Tip-in, 0.11 xG0–1
- P2 17:08ANAChris WagnerAssists: Ondrej Kase, Logan Shaw · Wrist, 0.14 xG0–2
- P3 4:42ANARyan KeslerAssists: Andrew Cogliano, Jakob Silfverberg · Wrist, 0.16 xG0–3
- P3 14:43ANARickard RakellAssists: Ryan Getzlaf, Patrick Eaves · Tip-in, 0.13 xG0–4
Penalties (9)
- P1 0:05ANAJosh Manson: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P1 2:12CHINick Schmaltz: Hooking2 min
- P1 6:05CHIMichal Rozsival: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P1 18:19ANACorey Perry: Slashing2 min
- P2 1:46CHITomas Jurco: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P3 6:00CHIMichal Rozsival: Cross checking2 min
- P3 6:00ANANick Ritchie: Match penatly 10 minutes10 min
- P3 11:47CHIJohn Hayden: Roughing2 min
- P3 11:47ANABrandon Montour: Roughing2 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 20:00Kesler won the faceoff against Kero
- 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.
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestPanik – Jurco – Schmaltz6:12
xG 0.72–0.03 (96%)attempts 10–3goals 0–0
- Tootoo – Hayden – Rasmussen2:51
xG 0.10–0.02 (83%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Desjardins – Kruger – Hartman4:26
xG 0.13–0.07 (65%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
- Hayden – Hartman – Schmaltz4:04
xG 0.08–0.09 (45%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestRozsival – Kempny12:08
xG 0.88–0.40 (69%)attempts 20–9goals 0–1
- Oduya – van Riemsdyk12:15
xG 0.25–0.48 (35%)attempts 9–9goals 0–1
- Campbell – Forsling13:41
xG 0.36–0.81 (31%)attempts 11–11goals 0–1
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestKesler – Cogliano – Silfverberg9:07
xG 0.80–0.15 (84%)attempts 8–5goals 1–0
- Wagner – Shaw – Ritchie3:48
xG 0.28–0.10 (74%)attempts 7–4goals 0–0
- Wagner – Shaw – Kase3:22
xG 0.23–0.13 (64%)attempts 3–4goals 1–0
- Vermette – Perry – Kase5:42
xG 0.00–0.15 (0%)attempts 0–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestManson – Theodore7:04
xG 0.95–0.27 (78%)attempts 8–6goals 2–0
- Megna – Montour10:02
xG 0.41–0.45 (48%)attempts 10–10goals 1–0
- Vatanen – Manson5:02
xG 0.04–0.10 (28%)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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it CHI. 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 52% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − CHI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).