Sun, Mar 24, 2019·United Center, Chicago
Colorado Avalanche 1, Chicago Blackhawks 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 63% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| COL | 07 | 110 | 03 | 00 | 120 |
| CHI | 014 | 011 | 115 | 12 | 242 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 15:26COLAlexander KerfootPPAssists: Tyson Barrie, Nathan MacKinnon · Deflected, 0.31 xG1–0
- P3 1:44CHIArtem AnisimovPPAssists: Brent Seabrook · Tip-in, 0.09 xG1–1
- OT 1:23CHIDuncan KeithGWGAssists: Brandon Saad · Wrist, 0.11 xG1–2
Penalties (5)
- P1 1:56COLPatrik Nemeth: High sticking2 min
- P1 5:09CHIMarcus Kruger: Tripping2 min
- P2 13:38CHIMarcus Kruger: Holding2 min · PPG
- P2 14:09CHIJonathan Toews: Hooking2 min
- P2 19:45COLDerick Brassard: Boarding2 min · PPG
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 20:00Anisimov won the faceoff against MacKinnon
- 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.
Colorado Avalanche
Forward lines
- bestBrassard – Calvert – Jost3:10
xG 0.33–0.13 (72%)attempts 5–5goals 0–0
- Soderberg – Wilson – Andrighetto2:58
xG 0.10–0.12 (44%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Soderberg – Brassard – Calvert2:19
xG 0.00–0.07 (0%)attempts 0–4goals 0–0
- Kerfoot – Compher – MacKinnon7:33
xG 0.10–0.20 (33%)attempts 6–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestNemeth – Zadorov9:20
xG 0.21–0.12 (63%)attempts 8–9goals 0–0
- Barrie – Girard2:09
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 0–1goals 0–0
- Cole – Barrie8:49
xG 0.25–0.27 (48%)attempts 9–9goals 0–0
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestToews – Kane – DeBrincat16:19
xG 0.81–0.22 (79%)attempts 27–14goals 0–0
- Perlini – Strome – Kampf4:46
xG 0.18–0.00 (98%)attempts 7–1goals 0–0
- Anisimov – Saad – Sikura11:40
xG 0.25–0.15 (62%)attempts 16–4goals 0–0
- Kunitz – Kruger – Kampf3:06
xG 0.04–0.05 (44%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKeith – Gustafsson17:02
xG 0.74–0.42 (64%)attempts 23–10goals 0–0
- Murphy – Koekkoek13:19
xG 0.37–0.22 (62%)attempts 15–6goals 0–0
- Seabrook – Forsling15:27
xG 0.23–0.50 (32%)attempts 15–18goals 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.
CHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CHI is favoured, below it COL. 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, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 63% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − COL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).