Sun, Feb 23, 2020·Little Caesars Arena, Detroit
Calgary Flames 4, Detroit Red Wings 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Calgary Flames win this game 58% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGY | 212 | 112 | 17 | 431 |
| DET | 16 | 09 | 114 | 229 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 6:46CGYJohnny GaudreauAssists: Noah Hanifin, Sean Monahan · Slap, 0.07 xG1–0
- P1 8:03CGYSean MonahanAssists: Elias Lindholm · Wrist, 0.26 xG2–0
- P1 15:48DETDylan LarkinAssists: Brendan Perlini, Patrik Nemeth · Wrist, 0.23 xG2–1
- P2 19:49CGYAndrew MangiapaneGWGAssists: Noah Hanifin, Mikael Backlund · Deflected, 0.08 xG3–1
- P3 18:00DETDylan LarkinAssists: Anthony Mantha, Madison Bowey · Wrist, 0.02 xG3–2
- P3 19:48CGYAndrew MangiapaneENUnassisted · Backhand, 0.62 xG4–2
Penalties (4)
- P2 11:35DETValtteri Filppula: Hooking2 min
- P2 19:58CGYMichael Stone: Cross checking2 min
- P3 8:33DETMadison Bowey: Roughing2 min
- P3 11:11CGYAndrew Mangiapane: 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 20:00Filppula won the faceoff against Backlund
- 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. Shift data for this game is incomplete, so treat these as rough.
Calgary Flames
Forward lines
- bestBacklund – Mangiapane – Tkachuk6:31
xG 0.42–0.00 (100%)attempts 11–1goals 0–0
- Rieder – Jankowski – Ryan3:18
xG 0.20–0.08 (73%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Lucic – Bennett – Dube5:32
xG 0.16–0.17 (48%)attempts 5–4goals 0–0
- Gaudreau – Lindholm – Monahan4:33
xG 0.09–0.23 (28%)attempts 2–2goals 1–1
Defence pairs
- bestHanifin – Andersson8:18
xG 0.81–0.00 (100%)attempts 14–1goals 1–0
- Kylington – Yelesin6:00
xG 0.36–0.07 (85%)attempts 5–3goals 1–0
- Stone – Brodie6:35
xG 0.32–0.36 (47%)attempts 11–6goals 0–1
Detroit Red Wings
Forward lines
- Nielsen – Helm – Glendening3:53
xG 0.00–0.02 (0%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
- Abdelkader – Erne – Ehn3:23
xG 0.01–0.20 (5%)attempts 1–5goals 0–0
- Mantha – Larkin – Fabbri6:02
xG 0.24–0.50 (32%)attempts 6–9goals 0–1
- Filppula – Bertuzzi – Perlini4:59
xG 0.00–0.44 (0%)attempts 0–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Biega – Nemeth7:24
xG 0.30–0.27 (53%)attempts 5–4goals 1–0
- Ericsson – Lindstrom5:30
xG 0.18–0.40 (30%)attempts 5–10goals 0–0
- Daley – Bowey5:59
xG 0.00–0.48 (0%)attempts 1–10goals 0–1
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.
DET's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line DET is favoured, below it CGY. 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, Calgary Flames win this game 58% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (DET − CGY), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).