Mon, Dec 2, 2019·United Center, Chicago
St. Louis Blues 4, Chicago Blackhawks 0
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 51% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| STL | 210 | 09 | 211 | 430 |
| CHI | 010 | 011 | 017 | 038 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 2:34STLMackenzie MacEachernGWGAssists: Vince Dunn · Backhand, 0.11 xG1–0
- P1 14:22STLJaden SchwartzPPAssists: Alex Pietrangelo, David Perron · Tip-in, 0.15 xG2–0
- P3 8:56STLBrayden SchennAssists: Nathan Walker, Jaden Schwartz · Slap, 0.06 xG3–0
- P3 18:11STLTyler BozakUnassisted · Slap, 0.08 xG4–0
Penalties (4)
- P1 3:53STLBrayden Schenn: Tripping2 min
- P1 14:08CHIPatrick Kane: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P2 0:21STLNathan Walker: Slashing2 min
- P2 13:52CHIJonathan Toews: Slashing2 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 Schenn
- 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.
St. Louis Blues
Forward lines
- bestBozak – Barbashev – Thomas12:05
xG 0.90–0.50 (64%)attempts 12–13goals 1–0
- Perron – O'Reilly – Sanford11:43
xG 0.30–0.20 (59%)attempts 6–7goals 0–0
- Brouwer – MacEachern – de la Rose9:09
xG 0.26–0.56 (32%)attempts 9–13goals 1–0
- Schenn – Schwartz – Walker13:15
xG 0.38–0.70 (35%)attempts 10–9goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestPietrangelo – Parayko18:49
xG 1.24–0.78 (61%)attempts 14–16goals 1–0
- Bouwmeester – Faulk18:09
xG 0.77–0.66 (54%)attempts 16–18goals 1–0
- Faulk – Dunn2:14
xG 0.12–0.08 (60%)attempts 3–3goals 1–0
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestToews – Saad – Nylander3:39
xG 0.20–0.12 (61%)attempts 3–5goals 0–0
- Kane – Carpenter – DeBrincat3:38
xG 0.11–0.04 (72%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Smith – Carpenter – Dach2:34
xG 0.05–0.01 (89%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Smith – Dach – Wedin3:16
xG 0.10–0.10 (50%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMurphy – Maatta15:52
xG 1.11–0.66 (63%)attempts 22–11goals 0–2
- Seabrook – de Haan13:40
xG 0.61–0.42 (59%)attempts 14–11goals 0–1
- de Haan – Gustafsson2:09
xG 0.19–0.16 (55%)attempts 4–1goals 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 STL. 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 51% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − STL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).