Skip to content
Ice Lab

Sat, Feb 19, 2022·Rogers Arena, Vancouver

Anaheim Ducks 7, Vancouver Canucks 4

Expected result

Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 78% of the time.

VAN winsANA wins

By period

Goals and shots on goal in each period.

TeamP1P2P3Total
ANA3831017725
VAN022929420

Goals, with shots on goal in grey.

Scoring

Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.

  1. P1 0:57ANATroy TerryAssists: Hampus Lindholm, John Gibson · Deflected, 0.06 xG1–0
  2. P1 3:23ANANicolas DeslauriersAssists: Derek Grant, Sam Carrick · Deflected, 0.08 xG2–0
  3. P1 14:08ANARickard RakellPPAssists: Jamie Drysdale, Trevor Zegras · Deflected, 0.10 xG3–0
  4. P2 1:35ANAAdam HenriquePPAssists: Jakob Silfverberg, Troy Terry · Slap, 0.38 xG4–0
  5. P2 4:20ANASam SteelGWGAssists: Trevor Zegras, Sonny Milano · Wrist, 0.13 xG5–0
  6. P2 4:52VANTanner PearsonAssists: Conor Garland, Elias Pettersson · Slap, 0.14 xG5–1
  7. P2 15:47VANElias PetterssonPPAssists: Quinn Hughes, J.T. Miller · Slap, 0.05 xG5–2
  8. P2 16:50ANAAdam HenriqueAssists: Trevor Zegras, Simon Benoit · Wrist, 0.45 xG6–2
  9. P3 3:49ANANicolas DeslauriersAssists: Sam Carrick · Wrist, 0.07 xG7–2
  10. P3 10:41VANConor GarlandAssists: Tanner Pearson, Elias Pettersson · Backhand, 0.03 xG7–3
  11. P3 16:28VANQuinn HughesAssists: Tyler Motte · Wrist, 0.02 xG7–4
Penalties (10)
  1. P1 9:54VANLuke Schenn: Cross checking2 min
  2. P1 13:49VANJ.T. Miller: Slashing2 min · PPG
  3. P1 16:41ANAHampus Lindholm: Interference2 min
  4. P2 1:14VANBo Horvat: Slashing2 min · PPG
  5. P2 2:18VANQuinn Hughes: Hooking2 min
  6. P2 7:06ANATroy Terry: Holding2 min
  7. P2 15:06ANAMaxime Comtois: Roughing2 min · PPG
  8. P3 12:32ANAMaxime Comtois: Roughing2 min
  9. P3 12:32VANVasily Podkolzin: Roughing2 min
  10. P3 12:32VANVasily Podkolzin: 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.

ANA00 SOG · 0.0 xG

20:00

P1

0.0 xG · 0 SOG0VAN
48% to win52% to win
← ANA attackVAN attack →
  1. P1 20:00Carrick won the faceoff against Pettersson
  • Goal
  • Shot
  • Miss
  • Block
  • Hit
  • Takeaway
  • Giveaway
  • Faceoff
  • Penalty

The numbers

Team totals, side by side.

ANAVAN
25Shots on goal20
3.0Expected goals1.5
54Shot attempts48
27Faceoffs won23
5Power plays3
8Penalty minutes12
19Hits26
20Blocked shots16
3Giveaways4
8Takeaways7

Line combinations that worked

Model-based

Each 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

  1. bestHenrique – Silfverberg – Zegras7:53

    xG 0.59–0.10 (86%)attempts 7–4goals 1–1

  2. Milano – Terry – Steel9:31

    xG 0.25–0.17 (59%)attempts 9–6goals 1–0

  3. Grant – Deslauriers – Carrick10:46

    xG 0.42–0.35 (55%)attempts 8–7goals 2–1

  4. Rakell – Comtois – Lundeström10:51

    xG 0.13–0.26 (34%)attempts 8–13goals 0–1

Defence pairs

  1. bestMahura – Benoit12:57

    xG 0.83–0.28 (75%)attempts 10–11goals 1–0

  2. Lindholm – Drysdale13:52

    xG 0.40–0.22 (65%)attempts 11–10goals 2–2

  3. Shattenkirk – Fowler16:26

    xG 0.57–0.44 (57%)attempts 13–14goals 0–1

Vancouver Canucks

Forward lines

  1. bestMotte – Lammikko – Highmore10:27

    xG 0.48–0.07 (87%)attempts 9–5goals 1–0

  2. Miller – Horvat – Boeser10:56

    xG 0.09–0.22 (29%)attempts 9–5goals 0–1

  3. Pearson – Garland – Pettersson10:22

    xG 0.21–0.38 (35%)attempts 6–8goals 2–1

  4. Dickinson – Hoglander – Podkolzin9:59

    xG 0.18–0.82 (18%)attempts 7–11goals 0–1

Defence pairs

  1. bestSchenn – Ekman-Larsson5:01

    xG 0.17–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–1goals 0–0

  2. Myers – Ekman-Larsson9:53

    xG 0.27–0.30 (48%)attempts 9–6goals 1–1

  3. Myers – Hamonic8:39

    xG 0.12–0.20 (38%)attempts 6–10goals 0–0

How the game flowed

Model-based

Chance quality for each side, minute by minute, with pressure underneath.

Expected goals flow

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.

VAN 1.5 xGANA 3.0 xG
0123P1P2P3EndxG

Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute

VANANA

Win probability

Model-based

How each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.

Win probability

VAN's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line VAN is favoured, below it ANA. Dots are goals.

Excitement 68/100 · #492 of 1312 this seasonSwing 0.66 · 7 goals in reach · 2-goal lead cutComeback index 48% (winner's lowest chance)
ANA 100%5050%50VAN 100%P1P2P3EndBiggest swing +15 pts

Did the better team win?

Every shot replayed 10,000 times, scoring with its expected-goal probability.

Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 78% of the time.

VAN winsANA wins

Simulated goal difference (VAN − ANA), 10,000 replays

-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
+1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7

The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).