Tue, Jan 15, 2019·Little Caesars Arena, Detroit
Anaheim Ducks 1, Detroit Red Wings 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 52% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 09 | 17 | 08 | 124 |
| DET | 08 | 08 | 39 | 325 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 12:03ANARickard RakellPPAssists: Nick Ritchie, Ryan Getzlaf · Wrist, 0.15 xG1–0
- P3 5:25DETAnthony ManthaAssists: Andreas Athanasiou, Dylan Larkin · Snap, 0.06 xG1–1
- P3 15:44DETGustav NyquistGWGAssists: Danny DeKeyser, Thomas Vanek · Slap, 0.15 xG1–2
- P3 17:27DETDarren HelmAssists: Danny DeKeyser · Snap, 0.09 xG1–3
Penalties (2)
- P2 11:19DETTyler Bertuzzi: Cross checking2 min · PPG
- P3 2:40DETNiklas Kronwall: Interference2 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 20:00Larkin won the faceoff against Getzlaf
- 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 – Kase14:21
xG 0.49–0.33 (60%)attempts 9–13goals 0–0
- Gibbons – Rowney – Sprong4:55
xG 0.15–0.04 (80%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Kesler – Gibbons – Sherwood3:43
xG 0.06–0.03 (62%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
- Shore – Rowney – Sprong4:54
xG 0.04–0.10 (28%)attempts 1–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestFowler – Manson17:31
xG 0.52–0.40 (57%)attempts 11–11goals 0–0
- Fowler – Lindholm2:01
xG 0.00–0.01 (0%)attempts 0–2goals 0–0
- Lindholm – Montour20:19
xG 0.45–0.64 (41%)attempts 12–20goals 0–1
Detroit Red Wings
Forward lines
- bestAbdelkader – de la Rose – Ehn8:11
xG 0.34–0.02 (95%)attempts 11–1goals 0–0
- Athanasiou – Mantha – Larkin3:19
xG 0.15–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 1–0
- Helm – Glendening – Bertuzzi3:09
xG 0.18–0.10 (64%)attempts 3–3goals 1–0
- Nyquist – Bertuzzi – Larkin8:37
xG 0.34–0.31 (53%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestJensen – DeKeyser5:17
xG 0.39–0.15 (72%)attempts 5–4goals 2–0
- Kronwall – Green20:00
xG 0.63–0.51 (55%)attempts 19–11goals 0–0
- DeKeyser – Cholowski10:13
xG 0.37–0.28 (57%)attempts 10–6goals 1–0
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.
DET's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line DET 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 52% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (DET − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).