Mon, Jan 31, 2022·United Center, Chicago
Vancouver Canucks 3, Chicago Blackhawks 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Vancouver Canucks win this game 70% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VAN | 111 | 110 | 111 | 332 |
| CHI | 06 | 08 | 17 | 121 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 12:21VANAlex ChiassonAssists: Justin Dowling · Wrist, 0.14 xG1–0
- P2 4:28VANBrock BoeserGWGAssists: Quinn Hughes, Jason Dickinson · Wrist, 0.16 xG2–0
- P3 13:01CHIConnor MurphyAssists: Patrick Kane, Kirby Dach · Slap, 0.06 xG2–1
- P3 19:39VANLuke SchennENUnassisted · Wrist, 0.47 xG3–1
Penalties (6)
- P1 15:12CHIHenrik Borgstrom: Hooking2 min
- P1 17:18VANBrad Hunt: Interference2 min
- P2 4:54CHICalvin de Haan: Tripping2 min
- P2 10:20CHISeth Jones: Tripping2 min
- P2 11:11VANJ.T. Miller: Slashing2 min
- P3 16:53CHIDylan Strome: Too many men on the ice2 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 20:00Lammikko won the faceoff against Strome
- 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.
Vancouver Canucks
Forward lines
- bestMotte – Lammikko – Highmore9:49
xG 0.39–0.06 (86%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
- Miller – Dickinson – Boeser10:34
xG 0.50–0.29 (63%)attempts 13–5goals 1–0
- Horvat – Garland – Pettersson10:25
xG 0.23–0.12 (67%)attempts 14–4goals 0–0
- Chiasson – Dowling – Hoglander6:53
xG 0.27–0.17 (61%)attempts 10–3goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestMyers – Ekman-Larsson16:04
xG 0.70–0.14 (84%)attempts 15–7goals 1–0
- Schenn – Hughes16:50
xG 0.60–0.34 (64%)attempts 24–6goals 1–0
- Myers – Hughes2:07
xG 0.10–0.16 (39%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestCarpenter – Entwistle – Kurashev5:28
xG 0.35–0.19 (65%)attempts 4–7goals 0–0
- Connolly – Carpenter – Lafferty2:28
xG 0.06–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- DeBrincat – Hagel – Dach3:13
xG 0.07–0.04 (60%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Kane – Kubalik – Borgstrom3:05
xG 0.06–0.18 (24%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestde Haan – Jones8:02
xG 0.26–0.11 (70%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- Jones – Jones2:55
xG 0.09–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
- de Haan – Gustafsson2:29
xG 0.18–0.11 (62%)attempts 5–3goals 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.
CHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CHI is favoured, below it VAN. 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, Vancouver Canucks win this game 70% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − VAN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).