Sat, Feb 23, 2019·Rogers Place, Edmonton
Anaheim Ducks 1, Edmonton Oilers 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Edmonton Oilers win this game 50% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 010 | 111 | 013 | 134 |
| EDM | 18 | 18 | 05 | 221 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 16:00EDMJosh CurrieAssists: Milan Lucic, Andrej Sekera · Wrist, 0.19 xG0–1
- P2 0:57EDMSam GagnerGWGAssists: Leon Draisaitl, Kris Russell · Tip-in, 0.07 xG0–2
- P2 11:43ANACarter RowneyAssists: Nick Ritchie, Michael Del Zotto · Wrist, 0.12 xG1–2
Penalties (2)
- P3 4:57ANARyan Kesler: Hooking2 min
- P3 16:22EDMLeon Draisaitl: 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 20:00Chiasson won the faceoff against Steel
- 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
- bestGrant – Silfverberg – Shore7:48
xG 0.27–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Kesler – Rowney – Ritchie8:53
xG 0.47–0.26 (64%)attempts 8–5goals 1–0
- Silfverberg – Shore – Steel3:51
xG 0.09–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–0goals 0–0
- Perry – Rakell – Steel7:13
xG 0.18–0.11 (62%)attempts 7–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestManson – Lindholm17:35
xG 0.65–0.10 (86%)attempts 23–8goals 0–0
- Megna – Montour12:49
xG 0.43–0.47 (48%)attempts 12–8goals 0–1
- Del Zotto – Fowler17:18
xG 0.65–1.20 (35%)attempts 18–12goals 1–0
Edmonton Oilers
Forward lines
- bestLucic – Cave – Currie10:05
xG 0.79–0.39 (67%)attempts 12–14goals 1–0
- Chiasson – Rieder – Draisaitl14:33
xG 0.72–0.34 (68%)attempts 12–15goals 0–0
- Brodziak – Malone – Rattie5:00
xG 0.04–0.19 (17%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- Gagner – Kassian – Nugent-Hopkins14:05
xG 0.39–0.59 (39%)attempts 4–16goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestSekera – Benning10:51
xG 0.66–0.43 (60%)attempts 10–13goals 1–1
- Larsson – Klefbom20:35
xG 0.63–0.55 (54%)attempts 10–19goals 0–0
- Russell – Nurse13:48
xG 0.15–0.63 (19%)attempts 6–16goals 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.
EDM's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line EDM 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, Edmonton Oilers win this game 50% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (EDM − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).