Skip to content
Ice Lab

Thu, Oct 3, 2019·Honda Center, Anaheim

Arizona Coyotes 1, Anaheim Ducks 2

Expected result

Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 51% of the time.

ANA winsARI wins

By period

Goals and shots on goal in each period.

TeamP1P2P3Total
ARI01418011133
ANA1611409229

Goals, with shots on goal in grey.

Scoring

Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.

  1. P1 14:32ANADerek GrantAssists: Devin Shore, Hampus Lindholm · Tip-in, 0.17 xG0–1
  2. P2 9:03ARIDerek StepanAssists: Phil Kessel, Clayton Keller · Wrist, 0.05 xG1–1
  3. P2 19:28ANACam FowlerGWGAssists: Carter Rowney, Max Jones · Wrist, 0.05 xG1–2
Penalties (2)
  1. P3 9:06ARICarl Soderberg: Interference goalkeeper2 min
  2. P3 12:14ANACarter Rowney: 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.

ARI00 SOG · 0.0 xG

20:00

P1

0.0 xG · 0 SOG0ANA
45% to win55% to win
← ARI attackANA attack →
  1. P1 20:00Richardson won the faceoff against Steel
  • Goal
  • Shot
  • Miss
  • Block
  • Hit
  • Takeaway
  • Giveaway
  • Faceoff
  • Penalty

The numbers

Team totals, side by side.

ARIANA
33Shots on goal29
2.3Expected goals2.5
70Shot attempts63
24Faceoffs won25
1Power plays1
2Penalty minutes2
15Hits26
13Blocked shots20
13Giveaways14
6Takeaways13

Line combinations that worked

Model-based

Each team's forward lines and defence pairs at 5-on-5 (two minutes or more together), best first by expected goals for minus against.

Arizona Coyotes

Forward lines

  1. bestDvorak – Fischer – Crouse10:18

    xG 0.41–0.25 (62%)attempts 12–9goals 0–0

  2. Soderberg – Schmaltz – Garland12:13

    xG 0.36–0.37 (50%)attempts 13–10goals 0–0

  3. Kessel – Stepan – Keller16:23

    xG 0.62–0.77 (45%)attempts 21–14goals 1–1

  4. Richardson – Grabner – Hinostroza11:13

    xG 0.32–0.91 (26%)attempts 11–22goals 0–0

Defence pairs

  1. bestOesterle – Chychrun15:28

    xG 0.70–0.42 (63%)attempts 20–16goals 1–1

  2. Goligoski – Hjalmarsson14:36

    xG 0.64–0.75 (46%)attempts 19–12goals 0–1

  3. Demers – Ekman-Larsson17:54

    xG 0.57–0.83 (41%)attempts 18–27goals 0–0

Anaheim Ducks

Forward lines

  1. bestHenrique – Terry – Jones10:38

    xG 0.49–0.36 (58%)attempts 17–10goals 0–0

  2. Grant – Shore – Rowney12:22

    xG 0.45–0.47 (49%)attempts 9–15goals 1–0

  3. Getzlaf – Ritchie – Kase10:27

    xG 0.43–0.57 (43%)attempts 17–11goals 0–1

  4. Silfverberg – Rakell – Steel11:51

    xG 0.15–0.48 (24%)attempts 7–16goals 0–0

Defence pairs

  1. bestFowler – Guhle17:16

    xG 0.87–0.50 (64%)attempts 23–14goals 1–0

  2. Manson – Lindholm17:36

    xG 0.81–0.60 (57%)attempts 18–22goals 0–1

  3. Holzer – Larsson12:43

    xG 0.31–0.58 (35%)attempts 14–16goals 0–0

How the game flowed

Model-based

Chance quality for each side, minute by minute, with pressure underneath.

Expected goals flow

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.

ANA 2.5 xGARI 2.3 xG
00.511.522.5P1P2P3EndxG

Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute

ANAARI

Win probability

Model-based

How each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.

Win probability

ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it ARI. Dots are goals.

Excitement 13/100 · #967 of 1082 this seasonSwing 0.87 · 3 goals in reachComeback index 52% (winner's lowest chance)
ARI 100%5050%50ANA 100%P1P2P3EndBiggest swing +23 pts

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 51% of the time.

ANA winsARI wins

Simulated goal difference (ANA − ARI), 10,000 replays

-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
+1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7

The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).