Thu, Jan 9, 2020·Amalie Arena, Tampa
Arizona Coyotes 0, Tampa Bay Lightning 4
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 75% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARI | 010 | 08 | 07 | 025 |
| TBL | 210 | 212 | 012 | 434 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 15:06TBLAlex KillornGWGAssists: Patrick Maroon, Cedric Paquette · Snap, 0.18 xG0–1
- P1 18:24TBLMikhail SergachevAssists: Cedric Paquette, Patrick Maroon · Deflected, 0.04 xG0–2
- P2 6:15TBLNikita KucherovAssists: Brayden Point, Steven Stamkos · Wrist, 0.04 xG0–3
- P2 8:52TBLNikita KucherovAssists: Steven Stamkos, Jan Rutta · Wrist, 0.13 xG0–4
Penalties (5)
- P2 3:30TBLBraydon Coburn: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P3 4:47TBLCedric Paquette: Tripping2 min
- P3 12:44ARITaylor Hall: Interference2 min
- P3 12:44TBLTyler Johnson: Roughing2 min
- P3 12:44ARITaylor Hall: Roughing2 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 20:00Point won the faceoff against Dvorak
- 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.
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- Soderberg – Schmaltz – Keller10:21
xG 0.36–0.38 (49%)attempts 10–8goals 0–0
- Richardson – Hinostroza – Fischer9:39
xG 0.15–0.26 (36%)attempts 6–12goals 0–0
- Hall – Dvorak – Garland11:26
xG 0.09–0.32 (22%)attempts 5–12goals 0–1
- Kessel – Stepan – Crouse12:18
xG 0.16–0.77 (18%)attempts 7–11goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- Oesterle – Lyubushkin16:23
xG 0.29–0.35 (45%)attempts 11–13goals 0–1
- Demers – Ekman-Larsson17:46
xG 0.41–0.59 (41%)attempts 15–19goals 0–1
- Goligoski – Chychrun17:22
xG 0.22–1.26 (15%)attempts 7–22goals 0–2
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestStamkos – Kucherov – Point15:54
xG 0.93–0.39 (70%)attempts 21–12goals 2–0
- Killorn – Maroon – Paquette6:32
xG 0.47–0.11 (81%)attempts 6–3goals 2–0
- Gourde – Verhaeghe – Stephens9:35
xG 0.38–0.16 (71%)attempts 13–8goals 0–0
- Johnson – Palat – Cirelli11:25
xG 0.23–0.10 (70%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHedman – Rutta15:54
xG 1.00–0.25 (80%)attempts 19–9goals 2–0
- Shattenkirk – Sergachev18:07
xG 0.75–0.32 (70%)attempts 20–17goals 1–0
- Coburn – Cernak14:22
xG 0.25–0.33 (43%)attempts 10–7goals 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.
TBL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line TBL is favoured, below it ARI. 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 75% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (TBL − ARI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).