Sat, Dec 9, 2017·Nationwide Arena, Columbus
Arizona Coyotes 0, Columbus Blue Jackets 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Arizona Coyotes win this game 55% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARI | 011 | 011 | 013 | 035 |
| CBJ | 110 | 015 | 09 | 134 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 0:30CBJJosh AndersonGWGAssists: Artemi Panarin, Pierre-Luc Dubois · Wrist, 0.11 xG0–1
Penalties (6)
- P1 13:21CBJScott Harrington: Interference2 min
- P2 0:31CBJMatt Calvert: Interference goalkeeper2 min
- P2 6:24ARIBrendan Perlini: Tripping2 min
- P3 7:35ARIOliver Ekman-Larsson: Tripping2 min
- P3 17:07CBJArtemi Panarin: Hooking2 min
- P3 17:07CBJArtemi Panarin: 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 20:00Dubois won the faceoff against Stepan
- 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.
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestDuclair – Domi – Dvorak12:31
xG 0.34–0.27 (55%)attempts 12–10goals 0–0
- Fischer – Strome – Keller8:58
xG 0.38–0.50 (43%)attempts 8–11goals 0–0
- Richardson – Rinaldo – Martinook10:42
xG 0.21–0.41 (33%)attempts 8–10goals 0–0
- Stepan – Rieder – Perlini11:09
xG 0.25–0.49 (34%)attempts 9–11goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestGoligoski – Chychrun12:39
xG 1.01–0.64 (61%)attempts 23–14goals 0–1
- Demers – Ekman-Larsson13:30
xG 0.45–0.14 (76%)attempts 12–8goals 0–0
- Demers – Connauton3:04
xG 0.07–0.07 (49%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
Columbus Blue Jackets
Forward lines
- bestAnderson – Panarin – Dubois11:42
xG 0.59–0.28 (67%)attempts 16–9goals 1–0
- Sedlak – Milano – Hannikainen5:09
xG 0.30–0.04 (89%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
- Foligno – Bjorkstrand – Wennberg9:48
xG 0.20–0.18 (52%)attempts 7–6goals 0–0
- Dubinsky – Calvert – Jenner11:38
xG 0.38–0.42 (48%)attempts 13–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestJones – Werenski17:08
xG 0.76–0.66 (54%)attempts 19–17goals 1–0
- Harrington – Nutivaara8:16
xG 0.29–0.20 (59%)attempts 6–8goals 0–0
- Johnson – Savard18:53
xG 0.52–0.61 (46%)attempts 14–16goals 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.
CBJ's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CBJ is favoured, below it ARI. 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, Arizona Coyotes win this game 55% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CBJ − ARI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).