Tue, Dec 11, 2018·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
Ottawa Senators 1, Nashville Predators 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Nashville Predators win this game 70% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OTT | 18 | 08 | 010 | 126 |
| NSH | 18 | 115 | 113 | 336 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 0:26OTTZack SmithAssists: Ryan Dzingel, Cody Ceci · Backhand, 0.05 xG1–0
- P1 15:38NSHAustin WatsonAssists: Mattias Ekholm, Colton Sissons · Tip-in, 0.11 xG1–1
- P2 9:01NSHRyan EllisGWGAssists: Roman Josi, Ryan Johansen · Slap, 0.11 xG1–2
- P3 1:59NSHCraig SmithUnassisted · Backhand, 0.10 xG1–3
Penalties (4)
- P1 5:25NSHRyan Hartman: Tripping2 min
- P2 16:15NSHKevin Fiala: High sticking double minor4 min
- P3 2:06OTTChris Tierney: Tripping2 min
- P3 5:09OTTBrady Tkachuk: 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 20:00Johansen won the faceoff against Smith
- 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.
Ottawa Senators
Forward lines
- Smith – Paajarvi – Dzingel9:02
xG 0.62–0.59 (51%)attempts 12–13goals 1–2
- Smith – Paajarvi – Tierney2:45
xG 0.00–0.00 (100%)attempts 1–0goals 0–0
- Stone – White – Tkachuk14:44
xG 0.65–0.68 (49%)attempts 17–17goals 0–0
- Boedker – Dzingel – Batherson2:56
xG 0.03–0.26 (9%)attempts 1–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestFalk – Harpur5:07
xG 0.33–0.23 (58%)attempts 6–5goals 0–1
- Falk – Burgdoerfer3:28
xG 0.16–0.17 (49%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Ceci – Chabot4:03
xG 0.21–0.23 (48%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestBonino – Watson – Sissons10:09
xG 0.65–0.27 (71%)attempts 11–13goals 1–0
- Grimaldi – Salomaki – Gaudreau5:17
xG 0.28–0.04 (87%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Johansen – Hartman – Fiala12:05
xG 0.79–0.57 (58%)attempts 17–11goals 1–1
- Smith – Jarnkrok – Tolvanen7:56
xG 0.18–0.55 (24%)attempts 10–7goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestHamhuis – Ekholm18:48
xG 1.28–0.55 (70%)attempts 23–18goals 1–0
- Weber – Bitetto9:06
xG 0.30–0.25 (55%)attempts 11–7goals 0–0
- Josi – Ellis17:09
xG 0.36–0.82 (30%)attempts 15–17goals 1–1
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 OTT. 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 70% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − OTT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).