Sun, Feb 11, 2018·Scottrade Center, St. Louis
Pittsburgh Penguins 4, St. Louis Blues 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, St. Louis Blues win this game 60% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIT | 07 | 16 | 310 | 423 |
| STL | 010 | 19 | 015 | 134 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 3:10STLKyle BrodziakAssists: Chris Thorburn, Scottie Upshall · Wrist, 0.34 xG0–1
- P2 3:31PITSidney CrosbyAssists: Conor Sheary · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–1
- P3 1:05PITBryan RustGWGUnassisted · Wrap-around, 0.09 xG2–1
- P3 11:13PITRiley SheahanAssists: Dominik Simon · Wrist, 0.14 xG3–1
- P3 17:12PITSidney CrosbyENAssists: Dominik Simon, Bryan Rust · Wrap-around, 0.67 xG4–1
Penalties (5)
- P1 0:59STLAlexander Steen: High sticking2 min
- P1 11:41PITPhil Kessel: Hooking2 min
- P2 14:59STLJay Bouwmeester: Slashing2 min
- P3 2:39PITRyan Reaves: Hooking2 min
- P3 19:18PITJustin Schultz: 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 20:00Schenn 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.
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestSheahan – Sheary – Aston-Reese2:40
xG 0.12–0.03 (80%)attempts 1–3goals 0–0
- Sheahan – Guentzel – Sheary2:31
xG 0.08–0.05 (61%)attempts 1–4goals 0–0
- Crosby – Sheary – Simon5:52
xG 0.06–0.03 (66%)attempts 2–2goals 1–0
- Reaves – Rowney – Aston-Reese2:04
xG 0.00–0.01 (0%)attempts 0–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCole – Oleksiak12:46
xG 0.53–0.39 (57%)attempts 9–11goals 1–0
- Letang – Dumoulin18:20
xG 0.42–0.73 (37%)attempts 14–17goals 0–1
- Schultz – Maatta13:57
xG 0.30–0.90 (25%)attempts 8–18goals 2–0
St. Louis Blues
Forward lines
- bestSteen – Stastny – Tarasenko14:24
xG 0.89–0.27 (77%)attempts 17–9goals 0–1
- Thorburn – Upshall – Brodziak3:58
xG 0.42–0.02 (96%)attempts 3–2goals 1–0
- Sobotka – Jaskin – Barbashev8:59
xG 0.41–0.17 (70%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
- Berglund – Schenn – Schwartz14:10
xG 0.23–0.23 (49%)attempts 9–8goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestBortuzzo – Dunn9:37
xG 0.63–0.27 (70%)attempts 14–8goals 0–1
- Gunnarsson – Pietrangelo13:39
xG 0.23–0.25 (49%)attempts 7–9goals 0–1
- Pietrangelo – Dunn2:48
xG 0.12–0.13 (47%)attempts 5–2goals 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.
STL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line STL is favoured, below it PIT. 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, St. Louis Blues win this game 60% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (STL − PIT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).