Mon, Jan 22, 2018·United Center, Chicago
Tampa Bay Lightning 2, Chicago Blackhawks 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 57% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 012 | 15 | 114 | 231 |
| CHI | 013 | 017 | 010 | 040 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 17:14TBLChris KunitzSHGWGAssists: Jake Dotchin, Brayden Point · Backhand, 0.09 xG1–0
- P3 18:26TBLYanni GourdeUnassisted · Slap, 0.03 xG2–0
Penalties (8)
- P1 2:00CHIAlex DeBrincat: Hooking2 min
- P1 7:09TBLDan Girardi: Slashing2 min
- P1 8:36CHIJordan Oesterle: Tripping2 min
- P1 14:38TBLAlex Killorn: Tripping2 min
- P1 15:53TBLTyler Johnson: High sticking2 min
- P2 16:06TBLMikhail Sergachev: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P2 16:06TBLMikhail Sergachev: High sticking2 min
- P3 7:29TBLSteven Stamkos: Tripping2 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 20:00Point won the faceoff against Toews
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestJohnson – Kucherov – Point11:35
xG 0.92–0.39 (70%)attempts 10–13goals 0–0
- Kunitz – Stamkos – Namestnikov9:01
xG 0.89–0.41 (68%)attempts 11–9goals 0–0
- Killorn – Peca – Gourde5:57
xG 0.14–0.05 (74%)attempts 10–3goals 1–0
- Stamkos – Kucherov – Namestnikov2:16
xG 0.02–0.02 (45%)attempts 1–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCoburn – Sustr10:21
xG 0.84–0.35 (71%)attempts 20–8goals 1–0
- Stralman – Dotchin13:44
xG 0.87–0.40 (68%)attempts 11–11goals 0–0
- Sustr – Sergachev3:38
xG 0.06–0.16 (28%)attempts 1–6goals 0–0
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestJurco – Hinostroza – Kampf6:00
xG 0.16–0.00 (100%)attempts 7–6goals 0–0
- Kane – Hinostroza – Schmaltz2:28
xG 0.14–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Toews – Saad – Duclair10:59
xG 0.51–0.41 (55%)attempts 16–7goals 0–0
- Sharp – Kane – Schmaltz7:59
xG 0.51–0.53 (49%)attempts 8–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKeith – Seabrook2:02
xG 0.07–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Seabrook – Gustafsson10:23
xG 0.47–0.54 (47%)attempts 9–8goals 0–0
- Keith – Oesterle14:32
xG 0.56–0.85 (40%)attempts 19–16goals 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.
CHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CHI is favoured, below it TBL. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 57% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).