Wed, Feb 27, 2019·Honda Center, Anaheim
Chicago Blackhawks 4, Anaheim Ducks 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 55% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | 013 | 210 | 212 | 435 |
| ANA | 08 | 215 | 19 | 332 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 0:49CHIAlex DeBrincatPPAssists: Erik Gustafsson, Dylan Strome · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–0
- P2 4:22ANADevin ShoreSHAssists: Josh Manson, Hampus Lindholm · Wrist, 0.14 xG1–1
- P2 16:42CHIArtem AnisimovSHAssists: Duncan Keith, Corey Crawford · Snap, 0.14 xG2–1
- P2 18:37ANACarter RowneyAssists: Ryan Kesler · Wrist, 0.16 xG2–2
- P3 5:35ANATroy TerryAssists: Derek Grant · Wrist, 0.17 xG2–3
- P3 15:06CHIAlex DeBrincatAssists: Jonathan Toews, Erik Gustafsson · Slap, 0.11 xG3–3
- P3 19:43CHIPatrick KaneGWGAssists: Brandon Saad, Jonathan Toews · Wrist, 0.11 xG4–3
Penalties (5)
- P1 14:37ANAHampus Lindholm: Holding2 min
- P2 0:35ANARickard Rakell: Boarding5 min · PPG
- P2 0:35ANARickard Rakell: Game misconduct10 min
- P2 8:02ANADaniel Sprong: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P2 15:48CHIConnor Murphy: 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 20:00Toews won the faceoff against Shore
- 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.
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestToews – Kane – Caggiula4:43
xG 0.40–0.13 (76%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Kunitz – Kruger – Hayden5:32
xG 0.48–0.28 (64%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Anisimov – Kane – Sikura2:20
xG 0.05–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Toews – Kane – Saad3:04
xG 0.25–0.23 (52%)attempts 4–4goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestKeith – Gustafsson3:38
xG 0.09–0.01 (92%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- Murphy – Dahlstrom14:21
xG 0.53–0.61 (47%)attempts 14–12goals 0–0
- Koekkoek – Gustafsson12:49
xG 0.80–0.90 (47%)attempts 13–16goals 1–1
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestKesler – Rowney – Ritchie11:56
xG 0.78–0.57 (58%)attempts 12–10goals 1–0
- Silfverberg – Shore – Terry2:12
xG 0.21–0.01 (94%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Silfverberg – Rakell – Shore6:06
xG 0.43–0.33 (56%)attempts 6–4goals 0–0
- Perry – Henrique – Sprong9:17
xG 0.32–0.37 (47%)attempts 10–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHolzer – Megna7:20
xG 0.64–0.21 (75%)attempts 12–7goals 0–0
- Fowler – Guhle16:34
xG 0.66–0.54 (55%)attempts 14–13goals 0–0
- Manson – Lindholm17:52
xG 0.94–1.31 (42%)attempts 18–20goals 2–2
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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it CHI. 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 55% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − CHI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).