Tue, Jan 9, 2018·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
Edmonton Oilers 1, Nashville Predators 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Nashville Predators win this game 58% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDM | 08 | 111 | 07 | 126 |
| NSH | 211 | 07 | 06 | 224 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 8:26NSHCraig SmithPPAssists: Viktor Arvidsson, P.K. Subban · Backhand, 0.14 xG0–1
- P1 15:31NSHViktor ArvidssonGWGAssists: Roman Josi, Ryan Johansen · Backhand, 0.21 xG0–2
- P2 0:45EDMConnor McDavidAssists: Matt Benning, Leon Draisaitl · Wrist, 0.11 xG1–2
Penalties (4)
- P1 8:18EDMMilan Lucic: Interference2 min · PPG
- P1 18:01EDMMichael Cammalleri: Slashing2 min
- P3 11:08NSHP.K. Subban: Interference2 min
- P3 12:40EDMMark Letestu: Slashing2 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 20:00McDavid won the faceoff against Johansen
- 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.
Edmonton Oilers
Forward lines
- bestMaroon – Draisaitl – McDavid16:43
xG 0.92–0.55 (63%)attempts 16–12goals 1–0
- Lucic – Nugent-Hopkins – Puljujarvi11:50
xG 0.37–0.26 (58%)attempts 16–9goals 0–0
- Cammalleri – Strome – Khaira11:01
xG 0.08–0.15 (36%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Letestu – Kassian – Caggiula6:04
xG 0.07–0.19 (27%)attempts 3–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSekera – Russell14:24
xG 0.43–0.22 (67%)attempts 13–5goals 0–0
- Klefbom – Benning16:44
xG 0.50–0.30 (63%)attempts 17–8goals 0–0
- Larsson – Klefbom2:14
xG 0.22–0.05 (81%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestBonino – Turris – Smith3:28
xG 0.17–0.01 (94%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Johansen – Sissons – Arvidsson2:18
xG 0.15–0.05 (76%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Hartnell – Bonino – Sissons7:31
xG 0.05–0.05 (53%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
- Turris – Smith – Fiala9:22
xG 0.37–0.39 (49%)attempts 7–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestJosi – Ellis16:42
xG 0.81–0.47 (63%)attempts 18–16goals 1–0
- Emelin – Weber13:11
xG 0.33–0.25 (57%)attempts 3–10goals 0–0
- Subban – Ekholm19:20
xG 0.25–0.65 (28%)attempts 9–17goals 0–1
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.
NSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NSH is favoured, below it EDM. 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, Nashville Predators win this game 58% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − EDM), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).