Tue, Dec 10, 2019·BB&T Center, Sunrise
Tampa Bay Lightning 2, Florida Panthers 1
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 80% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 114 | 118 | 016 | 248 |
| FLA | 013 | 09 | 16 | 128 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 6:42TBLSteven StamkosAssists: Alex Killorn · Wrist, 0.23 xG1–0
- P2 4:51TBLAlex KillornGWGAssists: Anthony Cirelli, Erik Cernak · Wrist, 0.12 xG2–0
- P3 18:00FLAEvgenii DadonovAssists: Jonathan Huberdeau, Mike Hoffman · Tip-in, 0.17 xG2–1
Penalties (5)
- P1 3:08TBLMathieu Joseph: High sticking2 min
- P1 13:18TBLKevin Shattenkirk: Interference2 min
- P2 11:42TBLOndrej Palat: Interference goalkeeper2 min
- P2 13:39FLAJonathan Huberdeau: Holding2 min
- P3 2:39FLAKeith Yandle: Tripping2 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 20:00Trocheck won the faceoff against Paquette
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestPalat – Kucherov – Point10:59
xG 0.98–0.02 (98%)attempts 15–5goals 0–0
- Verhaeghe – Joseph – Stephens5:42
xG 0.80–0.21 (79%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
- Killorn – Stamkos – Cirelli10:40
xG 0.83–0.45 (65%)attempts 14–11goals 2–0
- Maroon – Gourde – Paquette10:41
xG 0.67–0.35 (66%)attempts 15–9goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHedman – Rutta10:17
xG 1.63–0.17 (91%)attempts 19–8goals 1–0
- Sergachev – Rutta2:22
xG 0.57–0.14 (80%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
- McDonagh – Cernak13:17
xG 0.83–0.42 (67%)attempts 20–9goals 1–0
Florida Panthers
Forward lines
- bestVatrano – Acciari – Saarela7:59
xG 0.56–0.35 (62%)attempts 10–9goals 0–1
- Dadonov – Huberdeau – Barkov10:51
xG 0.24–0.85 (22%)attempts 12–15goals 0–0
- Hoffman – Connolly – Trocheck13:07
xG 0.53–1.20 (31%)attempts 13–18goals 0–0
- Boyle – Sceviour – Toninato5:44
xG 0.00–0.68 (0%)attempts 1–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestWeegar – Ekblad12:21
xG 0.73–0.43 (63%)attempts 19–10goals 0–0
- Stralman – Weegar2:55
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 1–1goals 0–0
- Yandle – Ekblad3:12
xG 0.10–0.13 (44%)attempts 2–3goals 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.
FLA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line FLA is favoured, below it TBL. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 80% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (FLA − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).