Tue, Mar 15, 2022·United Center, Chicago
Boston Bruins 2, Chicago Blackhawks 1 (OT)
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Boston Bruins win this game 94% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOS | 014 | 021 | 111 | 12 | 248 |
| CHI | 04 | 07 | 19 | 00 | 120 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P3 4:43BOSPatrice BergeronAssists: Brad Marchand, Taylor Hall · Wrist, 0.24 xG1–0
- P3 9:36CHIBrandon HagelAssists: Caleb Jones, Jake McCabe · Tip-in, 0.07 xG1–1
- OT 1:40BOSMatt GrzelcykGWGAssists: Taylor Hall, David Pastrnak · Wrist, 0.06 xG2–1
Penalties (7)
- P1 5:02BOSMatt Grzelcyk: Interference2 min
- P1 10:26CHIDylan Strome: Tripping2 min
- P2 3:05CHIPatrick Kane: High sticking2 min
- P2 16:22CHISam Lafferty: Interference2 min
- P2 19:15BOSMike Reilly: Tripping2 min
- P3 2:34CHICalvin de Haan: Tripping2 min
- P3 15:13BOSCraig Smith: Delaying game unsuccessful challenge2 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 20:00Nosek 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.
Boston Bruins
Forward lines
- bestHaula – Hall – Pastrnak10:20
xG 0.80–0.12 (87%)attempts 14–6goals 0–0
- Bergeron – Marchand – DeBrusk10:29
xG 0.66–0.25 (73%)attempts 12–8goals 0–0
- Smith – Coyle – Frederic9:25
xG 0.26–0.13 (67%)attempts 7–6goals 0–0
- Foligno – Lazar – Nosek8:02
xG 0.30–0.18 (62%)attempts 6–9goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestReilly – McAvoy12:13
xG 1.47–0.29 (83%)attempts 25–9goals 0–0
- Forbort – Clifton9:06
xG 0.56–0.25 (70%)attempts 10–8goals 0–1
- Forbort – McAvoy3:29
xG 0.05–0.02 (68%)attempts 1–4goals 0–0
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestToews – Hagel – Dach10:36
xG 0.35–0.12 (74%)attempts 8–4goals 1–0
- Carpenter – Lafferty – Entwistle5:50
xG 0.14–0.16 (47%)attempts 7–4goals 0–0
- Carpenter – Lafferty – Borgstrom2:37
xG 0.00–0.19 (0%)attempts 1–3goals 0–0
- Kane – Strome – DeBrincat13:47
xG 0.23–0.95 (19%)attempts 12–17goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Jones – Stillman3:16
xG 0.09–0.18 (34%)attempts 2–5goals 0–0
- Gustafsson – Stillman3:13
xG 0.13–0.32 (29%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- de Haan – Jones13:07
xG 0.39–0.59 (40%)attempts 15–15goals 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 BOS. 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, Boston Bruins win this game 94% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − BOS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).