Mon, Jan 27, 2020·SAP Center at San Jose, San Jose
Anaheim Ducks 2, San Jose Sharks 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 69% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 04 | 19 | 115 | 228 |
| SJS | 211 | 113 | 17 | 431 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 1:55SJSStefan NoesenAssists: Joel Kellman · Deflected, 0.13 xG0–1
- P1 4:35SJSPatrick MarleauUnassisted · Wrist, 0.12 xG0–2
- P2 9:04ANAOndrej KaseSHAssists: Erik Gudbranson · Backhand, 0.24 xG1–2
- P2 15:32SJSPatrick MarleauGWGAssists: Brenden Dillon · Snap, 0.23 xG1–3
- P3 2:28SJSStefan NoesenAssists: Erik Karlsson, Dylan Gambrell · Snap, 0.14 xG1–4
- P3 18:07ANANick RitchiePPAssists: Sam Steel, Hampus Lindholm · Snap, 0.11 xG2–4
Penalties (5)
- P2 8:16ANACam Fowler: Tripping2 min
- P3 5:13SJSMelker Karlsson: Interference2 min
- P3 17:47SJSTomas Hertl: Interference2 min · PPG
- P3 17:47SJSEvander Kane: Fighting5 min
- P3 17:47ANAErik Gudbranson: Fighting5 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 20:00Hertl won the faceoff against Getzlaf
- 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.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestGrant – Deslauriers – Rowney8:11
xG 0.37–0.18 (68%)attempts 9–3goals 0–1
- Kase – Steel – Jones11:11
xG 0.23–0.12 (65%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0
- Henrique – Shore – Terry7:26
xG 0.17–0.38 (32%)attempts 5–10goals 0–0
- Getzlaf – Rakell – Terry4:31
xG 0.08–0.28 (22%)attempts 1–3goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- Fowler – Manson16:51
xG 0.72–0.75 (49%)attempts 14–13goals 0–2
- Manson – Lindholm2:35
xG 0.00–0.09 (0%)attempts 0–2goals 0–0
- Gudbranson – Lindholm15:57
xG 0.32–0.66 (33%)attempts 17–10goals 0–0
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestMarleau – Sorensen – Gambrell11:58
xG 0.96–0.28 (77%)attempts 12–8goals 2–0
- Kane – Hertl – Meier11:18
xG 0.93–0.46 (67%)attempts 17–11goals 0–0
- Thornton – Goodrow – Labanc11:47
xG 0.52–0.25 (67%)attempts 11–5goals 0–0
- Noesen – Karlsson – Kellman9:41
xG 0.27–0.29 (48%)attempts 6–9goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestBurns – Dillon18:00
xG 1.42–0.75 (65%)attempts 24–17goals 2–0
- Vlasic – Karlsson15:51
xG 0.89–0.50 (64%)attempts 13–14goals 0–0
- Ferraro – Simek14:54
xG 0.46–0.21 (69%)attempts 10–8goals 1–0
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.
SJS's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line SJS is favoured, below it ANA. 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, San Jose Sharks win this game 69% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (SJS − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).