Tue, Dec 10, 2019·PPG Paints Arena, Pittsburgh
Montréal Canadiens 4, Pittsburgh Penguins 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Montréal Canadiens win this game 60% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MTL | 05 | 317 | 14 | 426 |
| PIT | 110 | 011 | 013 | 134 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 2:59PITJake GuentzelAssists: Bryan Rust, Evgeni Malkin · Wrist, 0.16 xG0–1
- P2 12:24MTLTomas TatarPPAssists: Brendan Gallagher, Phillip Danault · Wrist, 0.11 xG1–1
- P2 16:17MTLJoel ArmiaGWGAssists: Jeff Petry · Wrist, 0.14 xG2–1
- P2 19:45MTLShea WeberAssists: Artturi Lehkonen, Joel Armia · Backhand, 0.07 xG3–1
- P3 18:21MTLBrendan GallagherENAssists: Tomas Tatar, Shea Weber · Wrist, 0.65 xG4–1
Penalties (2)
- P1 10:21MTLJordan Weal: Delaying game bench face off violation2 min
- P2 11:00PITEvgeni Malkin: Slashing2 min · PPG
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 20:00Malkin won the faceoff against Danault
- 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.
Montréal Canadiens
Forward lines
- bestWeal – Cousins – Suzuki12:18
xG 0.48–0.28 (63%)attempts 4–9goals 0–0
- Thompson – Peca – Barber7:48
xG 0.15–0.17 (47%)attempts 7–7goals 0–0
- Tatar – Gallagher – Danault13:35
xG 0.35–0.43 (45%)attempts 10–11goals 0–1
- Armia – Lehkonen – Domi11:36
xG 0.18–0.41 (31%)attempts 5–17goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestPetry – Leskinen4:26
xG 0.33–0.13 (72%)attempts 7–4goals 1–0
- Fleury – Leskinen5:56
xG 0.36–0.24 (60%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- Chiarot – Kulak2:59
xG 0.28–0.16 (63%)attempts 2–6goals 0–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestMcCann – Simon – Aston-Reese3:42
xG 0.33–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–0goals 0–0
- Malkin – Rust – Guentzel18:26
xG 0.80–0.67 (54%)attempts 20–11goals 1–1
- Noesen – Galchenyuk – Lafferty8:00
xG 0.26–0.15 (63%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
- Blueger – Tanev – Aston-Reese7:46
xG 0.13–0.14 (49%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestLetang – Marino18:46
xG 0.83–0.45 (65%)attempts 17–11goals 1–2
- Johnson – Schultz16:19
xG 0.35–0.33 (51%)attempts 15–8goals 0–0
- Ruhwedel – Pettersson12:27
xG 0.23–0.60 (28%)attempts 10–9goals 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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it MTL. 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, Montréal Canadiens win this game 60% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − MTL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).