Tue, Nov 27, 2018·Amalie Arena, Tampa
Anaheim Ducks 3, Tampa Bay Lightning 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 61% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 09 | 16 | 27 | 322 |
| TBL | 010 | 111 | 014 | 135 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 12:04ANAJosh MansonAssists: Adam Henrique, Nick Ritchie · Wrist, 0.12 xG1–0
- P2 18:34TBLBrayden PointAssists: Nikita Kucherov, Ryan McDonagh · Wrist, 0.10 xG1–1
- P3 4:51ANANick RitchiePPGWGAssists: Pontus Aberg, Ondrej Kase · Backhand, 0.24 xG2–1
- P3 5:39ANACarter RowneyAssists: Marcus Pettersson, Pontus Aberg · Backhand, 0.07 xG3–1
Penalties (7)
- P1 1:23ANAJosh Manson: Interference2 min
- P1 19:50TBLNikita Kucherov: Slashing2 min
- P3 4:13TBLNikita Kucherov: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P3 7:47ANABrandon Montour: Hooking2 min
- P3 9:14ANABrian Gibbons: High sticking2 min
- P3 12:12TBLBrayden Point: Interference goalkeeper2 min
- P3 17:13ANARyan Getzlaf: 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 20:00Kesler won the faceoff against Cirelli
- 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.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestHenrique – Ritchie – Kase10:29
xG 0.43–0.33 (56%)attempts 8–9goals 1–0
- Gibbons – Aberg – Rowney8:01
xG 0.22–0.22 (50%)attempts 5–4goals 1–0
- Getzlaf – Silfverberg – Rakell13:45
xG 0.57–0.80 (42%)attempts 10–19goals 0–1
- Kesler – Cogliano – Sherwood10:02
xG 0.27–0.52 (34%)attempts 8–15goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestWelinski – Montour10:24
xG 0.40–0.22 (65%)attempts 11–7goals 0–0
- Dotchin – Pettersson7:46
xG 0.17–0.15 (53%)attempts 6–4goals 1–0
- Pettersson – Montour4:51
xG 0.18–0.23 (45%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestKillorn – Joseph – Cirelli6:40
xG 0.27–0.02 (93%)attempts 7–3goals 0–0
- Johnson – Kucherov – Point14:24
xG 0.95–0.81 (54%)attempts 17–10goals 1–0
- Stamkos – Miller – Gourde10:47
xG 0.39–0.33 (54%)attempts 11–12goals 0–0
- Callahan – Paquette – Erne8:44
xG 0.20–0.23 (46%)attempts 6–6goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestGirardi – Hedman15:05
xG 0.60–0.30 (67%)attempts 20–13goals 0–0
- McDonagh – Cernak14:22
xG 0.59–0.44 (57%)attempts 14–7goals 1–0
- Coburn – Sergachev12:19
xG 0.43–0.62 (41%)attempts 9–9goals 0–2
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.
TBL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line TBL is favoured, below it ANA. 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 61% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (TBL − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).