Wed, Jan 2, 2019·Gila River Arena, Glendale
Edmonton Oilers 3, Arizona Coyotes 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Arizona Coyotes win this game 52% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDM | 07 | 212 | 15 | 324 |
| ARI | 116 | 09 | 05 | 130 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 12:08ARIBrad RichardsonAssists: Richard Panik, Kevin Connauton · Tip-in, 0.12 xG0–1
- P2 2:49EDMLeon DraisaitlAssists: Adam Larsson, Connor McDavid · Tip-in, 0.10 xG1–1
- P2 13:43EDMConnor McDavidGWGAssists: Zack Kassian, Leon Draisaitl · Backhand, 0.13 xG2–1
- P3 19:15EDMConnor McDavidENUnassisted · Wrist, 0.77 xG3–1
Penalties (4)
- P1 5:56ARIConor Garland: Hooking2 min
- P1 16:12EDMKyle Brodziak: Boarding2 min
- P1 17:10ARIAlex Galchenyuk: Hooking2 min
- P2 6:51ARIConor Garland: Hooking2 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 Richardson
- 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
- bestKassian – Draisaitl – McDavid15:11
xG 1.05–0.91 (54%)attempts 17–12goals 2–1
- Brodziak – Rattie – Gambardella5:07
xG 0.02–0.01 (61%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
- Rieder – Nugent-Hopkins – Puljujarvi10:46
xG 0.21–0.39 (35%)attempts 7–14goals 0–0
- Lucic – Spooner – Khaira7:43
xG 0.04–0.25 (14%)attempts 4–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestLarsson – Nurse13:47
xG 0.70–0.21 (77%)attempts 11–7goals 2–0
- Larsson – Jones4:05
xG 0.08–0.06 (58%)attempts 4–4goals 0–0
- Petrovic – Jones16:16
xG 0.54–0.67 (45%)attempts 11–21goals 0–0
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestArchibald – Cousins – Crouse9:19
xG 0.25–0.07 (79%)attempts 11–7goals 0–0
- Richardson – Panik – Hinostroza10:46
xG 0.56–0.44 (56%)attempts 10–8goals 0–2
- Kempe – Fischer – Garland5:54
xG 0.01–0.11 (11%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
- Stepan – Galchenyuk – Keller12:48
xG 0.37–0.68 (35%)attempts 12–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestConnauton – Oesterle13:12
xG 0.57–0.32 (64%)attempts 16–10goals 1–0
- Ekman-Larsson – Oesterle2:26
xG 0.14–0.02 (86%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
- Chychrun – Lyubushkin13:48
xG 0.06–0.13 (32%)attempts 8–8goals 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.
ARI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ARI 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, Arizona Coyotes win this game 52% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ARI − EDM), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).