Sun, Mar 31, 2019·PPG Paints Arena, Pittsburgh
Carolina Hurricanes 1, Pittsburgh Penguins 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 66% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAR | 09 | 09 | 120 | 138 |
| PIT | 212 | 07 | 19 | 328 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 10:45PITGarrett WilsonAssists: Matt Cullen, Adam Johnson · Wrist, 0.29 xG0–1
- P1 18:45PITMatt CullenGWGAssists: Adam Johnson, Brian Dumoulin · Snap, 0.13 xG0–2
- P3 0:46PITPatric HornqvistAssists: Dominik Simon, Nick Bjugstad · Snap, 0.17 xG0–3
- P3 12:12CARJaccob SlavinPPAssists: Andrei Svechnikov, Micheal Ferland · Slap, 0.06 xG1–3
Penalties (7)
- P1 19:25CARJustin Williams: Roughing2 min
- P1 19:25PITPatric Hornqvist: Roughing2 min
- P1 19:33CARJustin Faulk: Tripping2 min
- P2 5:33PITOlli Maatta: Boarding2 min
- P3 10:49PITJack Johnson: Cross checking2 min · PPG
- P3 19:27CARDougie Hamilton: Slashing2 min
- P3 19:27PITBrian Dumoulin: Delaying game puck over glass2 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 20:00Crosby won the faceoff against Aho
- 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.
Carolina Hurricanes
Forward lines
- bestWilliams – Niederreiter – Aho15:18
xG 0.74–0.28 (73%)attempts 26–6goals 0–1
- Staal – Teravainen – Svechnikov10:55
xG 0.28–0.42 (40%)attempts 14–6goals 0–1
- Ferland – Martinook – Wallmark8:52
xG 0.43–0.59 (42%)attempts 8–9goals 0–0
- McKegg – McGinn – Foegele7:44
xG 0.19–0.75 (20%)attempts 3–8goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestHamilton – Pesce3:39
xG 0.12–0.02 (84%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
- Faulk – Pesce12:34
xG 0.35–0.28 (56%)attempts 15–7goals 0–0
- Slavin – van Riemsdyk2:19
xG 0.05–0.02 (73%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestCullen – Wilson – Johnson4:00
xG 0.65–0.02 (97%)attempts 4–4goals 2–0
- Hornqvist – Bjugstad – Simon4:00
xG 0.30–0.01 (95%)attempts 5–3goals 1–0
- Kessel – Blueger – McCann3:03
xG 0.20–0.09 (68%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Kessel – Bjugstad – Simon7:23
xG 0.25–0.20 (56%)attempts 3–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestDumoulin – Maatta16:44
xG 1.09–0.40 (73%)attempts 15–15goals 1–0
- Johnson – Schultz16:19
xG 1.29–1.03 (56%)attempts 17–23goals 1–0
- Gudbranson – Pettersson15:45
xG 0.24–0.50 (33%)attempts 5–20goals 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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it CAR. 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 66% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − CAR), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).