Thu, Apr 22, 2021·Amalie Arena, Tampa
Columbus Blue Jackets 1, Tampa Bay Lightning 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 85% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBJ | 16 | 09 | 010 | 125 |
| TBL | 05 | 18 | 215 | 328 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 9:36CBJSeth JonesPPAssists: Oliver Bjorkstrand, Patrik Laine · Slap, 0.04 xG1–0
- P2 14:51TBLBlake ColemanAssists: Yanni Gourde · Snap, 0.10 xG1–1
- P3 8:14TBLOndrej PalatGWGAssists: Alex Killorn · Wrist, 0.14 xG1–2
- P3 19:35TBLBlake ColemanENUnassisted · Snap, 0.51 xG1–3
Penalties (4)
- P1 8:57TBLOndrej Palat: Cross checking2 min · PPG
- P2 2:48CBJJosh Dunne: Holding2 min
- P2 7:55CBJKole Sherwood: Roughing2 min
- P3 9:56CBJJosh Dunne: Hooking2 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 20:00Gourde won the faceoff against Roslovic
- 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.
Columbus Blue Jackets
Forward lines
- bestGerbe – Matteau – Texier8:58
xG 0.23–0.02 (91%)attempts 9–1goals 0–0
- Bjorkstrand – Roslovic – Laine2:02
xG 0.13–0.02 (87%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- MacInnis – Sherwood – Dunne7:16
xG 0.01–0.10 (8%)attempts 2–5goals 0–0
- Bjorkstrand – Domi – Robinson11:50
xG 0.21–0.43 (32%)attempts 6–10goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKukan – Bayreuther16:24
xG 0.31–0.23 (57%)attempts 10–11goals 0–0
- Del Zotto – Jones16:15
xG 0.40–0.49 (45%)attempts 14–14goals 0–0
- Gavrikov – Lehtonen14:10
xG 0.07–0.25 (22%)attempts 6–6goals 0–1
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestPoint – Cirelli – Barré-Boulet7:18
xG 0.21–0.13 (61%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
- Killorn – Johnson – Cirelli4:11
xG 0.08–0.01 (86%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Maroon – Joseph – Colton6:37
xG 0.05–0.02 (72%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
- Coleman – Goodrow – Gourde11:41
xG 0.27–0.24 (53%)attempts 9–8goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestHedman – Cernak13:38
xG 0.60–0.25 (71%)attempts 13–9goals 1–0
- Schenn – Sergachev8:59
xG 0.11–0.10 (54%)attempts 4–4goals 0–0
- Schenn – Hedman2:12
xG 0.00–0.04 (0%)attempts 0–1goals 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 CBJ. 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 85% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (TBL − CBJ), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).