Sat, Feb 16, 2019·Gila River Arena, Glendale
Toronto Maple Leafs 0, Arizona Coyotes 2
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TOR | 04 | 07 | 011 | 022 |
| ARI | 011 | 28 | 010 | 229 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 3:19ARIAlex GalchenyukGWGAssists: Jordan Oesterle · Wrist, 0.16 xG0–1
- P2 5:59ARIJosh ArchibaldAssists: Derek Stepan, Lawson Crouse · Wrist, 0.28 xG0–2
Penalties (4)
- P1 18:08ARIOliver Ekman-Larsson: Hooking2 min
- P2 10:48ARIClayton Keller: High sticking2 min
- P2 13:53ARIOliver Ekman-Larsson: High sticking double minor4 min
- P3 9:05TORJake Gardiner: 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 20:00Matthews 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.
Toronto Maple Leafs
Forward lines
- bestKadri – Brown – Nylander5:21
xG 0.15–0.00 (97%)attempts 7–1goals 0–0
- Kapanen – Marner – Matthews4:14
xG 0.06–0.03 (66%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Marleau – Kadri – Brown3:12
xG 0.02–0.10 (19%)attempts 2–7goals 0–0
- Tavares – Hyman – Nylander3:38
xG 0.00–0.18 (0%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Muzzin – Zaitsev13:04
xG 0.19–0.45 (29%)attempts 11–14goals 0–0
- Gardiner – Dermott11:56
xG 0.20–0.52 (28%)attempts 10–10goals 0–1
- Hainsey – Rielly11:01
xG 0.04–0.78 (4%)attempts 8–14goals 0–1
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestCousins – Galchenyuk – Keller11:31
xG 0.72–0.15 (83%)attempts 16–10goals 1–0
- Stepan – Archibald – Crouse10:58
xG 0.77–0.21 (78%)attempts 14–13goals 1–0
- Weal – Fischer – Garland5:06
xG 0.15–0.02 (88%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Richardson – Kempe – Hinostroza8:02
xG 0.04–0.05 (45%)attempts 4–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHjalmarsson – Ekman-Larsson12:52
xG 0.57–0.05 (92%)attempts 10–9goals 1–0
- Oesterle – Lyubushkin9:56
xG 0.44–0.05 (89%)attempts 13–4goals 1–0
- Goligoski – Chychrun17:54
xG 0.70–0.37 (66%)attempts 18–20goals 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 TOR. 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 − TOR), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).