Wed, Apr 3, 2019·Honda Center, Anaheim
Calgary Flames 1, Anaheim Ducks 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 61% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGY | 111 | 010 | 05 | 126 |
| ANA | 211 | 112 | 09 | 332 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 5:01ANASam SteelAssists: Rickard Rakell, Jakob Silfverberg · Slap, 0.12 xG0–1
- P1 6:58ANAMax JonesGWGAssists: Carter Rowney, Derek Grant · Wrist, 0.11 xG0–2
- P1 8:28CGYDerek RyanAssists: Johnny Gaudreau, Austin Czarnik · Backhand, 0.10 xG1–2
- P2 4:57ANARyan GetzlafAssists: Carter Rowney · Snap, 0.06 xG1–3
Penalties (7)
- P1 16:07CGYMichael Stone: Interference2 min
- P1 17:28ANANick Ritchie: Tripping2 min
- P2 2:53ANAJacob Larsson: Interference2 min
- P2 6:12ANADevin Shore: Delaying game2 min
- P2 15:45ANACam Fowler: Delaying game2 min
- P2 0:00ANAJacob Larsson: Boarding2 min
- P3 5:31CGYMichael Frolik: 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 20:00Getzlaf won the faceoff against Jankowski
- 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.
Calgary Flames
Forward lines
- Frolik – Backlund – Tkachuk11:21
xG 0.63–0.73 (46%)attempts 11–13goals 0–0
- Quine – Hathaway – Mangiapane8:09
xG 0.04–0.21 (16%)attempts 3–7goals 0–0
- Frolik – Quine – Hathaway2:08
xG 0.00–0.17 (0%)attempts 1–2goals 0–0
- Gaudreau – Czarnik – Ryan9:29
xG 0.21–0.50 (29%)attempts 5–8goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- Andersson – Fantenberg14:29
xG 0.69–0.67 (51%)attempts 10–12goals 0–0
- Stone – Välimäki11:28
xG 0.44–0.68 (39%)attempts 8–15goals 1–0
- Prout – Kylington13:38
xG 0.19–1.02 (15%)attempts 7–15goals 0–2
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestSilfverberg – Rakell – Steel11:59
xG 1.22–0.55 (69%)attempts 15–8goals 1–0
- Grant – Rowney – Jones8:24
xG 0.72–0.06 (92%)attempts 14–2goals 1–0
- Getzlaf – Ritchie – Sprong8:28
xG 0.43–0.28 (60%)attempts 13–4goals 0–0
- Perry – Henrique – Shore10:49
xG 0.23–0.24 (49%)attempts 6–8goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestLindholm – Larsson13:51
xG 1.32–0.40 (77%)attempts 24–8goals 2–0
- Holzer – Megna12:05
xG 0.61–0.10 (86%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0
- Fowler – Welinski16:37
xG 0.66–0.81 (45%)attempts 14–13goals 0–1
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 CGY. 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 61% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − CGY), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).