Sat, Apr 9, 2022·Wells Fargo Center, Philadelphia
Anaheim Ducks 5, Philadelphia Flyers 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 74% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 06 | 317 | 211 | 534 |
| PHI | 216 | 04 | 113 | 333 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 1:39PHITravis SanheimAssists: Morgan Frost, Travis Konecny · Snap, 0.04 xG0–1
- P1 2:28PHIRonnie AttardAssists: Hayden Hodgson, Scott Laughton · Wrist, 0.01 xG0–2
- P2 3:06ANASonny MilanoAssists: Jamie Drysdale, Cam Fowler · Wrist, 0.16 xG1–2
- P2 4:38ANAZachary Aston-ReeseAssists: Adam Henrique, Andrej Sustr · Tip-in, 0.10 xG2–2
- P2 14:13ANATrevor ZegrasPPAssists: Urho Vaakanainen, Jamie Drysdale · Slap, 0.04 xG3–2
- P3 3:53PHIIvan ProvorovAssists: Nate Thompson, Cam York · Snap, 0.11 xG3–3
- P3 11:38ANATrevor ZegrasGWGAssists: Derek Grant · Backhand, 0.02 xG4–3
- P3 14:33ANADerek GrantAssists: Andrej Sustr, Dominik Simon · Tip-in, 0.08 xG5–3
Penalties (4)
- P1 4:11ANAMaxime Comtois: Tripping2 min
- P1 8:16ANAJamie Drysdale: High sticking2 min
- P2 12:30PHIScott Laughton: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P3 11:53PHIRonnie Attard: Interference2 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 20:00Laughton won the faceoff against Henrique
- 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.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestHenrique – Terry – Zegras4:50
xG 0.69–0.10 (88%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Milano – Mayhew – Lundeström6:03
xG 0.55–0.00 (100%)attempts 8–1goals 1–0
- Henrique – Simon – Aston-Reese6:22
xG 0.57–0.33 (63%)attempts 8–4goals 1–1
- Grant – Carrick – Aston-Reese2:11
xG 0.14–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–0goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestShattenkirk – Fowler5:35
xG 0.31–0.13 (70%)attempts 8–4goals 0–0
- Sustr – Benoit12:54
xG 0.42–0.31 (58%)attempts 11–10goals 2–0
- Fowler – Drysdale12:04
xG 0.61–0.54 (53%)attempts 14–15goals 1–1
Philadelphia Flyers
Forward lines
- bestvan Riemsdyk – Konecny – Frost9:40
xG 0.52–0.31 (62%)attempts 11–9goals 1–0
- Hayes – Tippett – Cates10:30
xG 0.57–0.76 (43%)attempts 14–9goals 0–0
- Thompson – Brown – Lindblom7:28
xG 0.28–0.58 (33%)attempts 6–15goals 1–2
- Atkinson – Laughton – Hodgson8:35
xG 0.03–0.54 (5%)attempts 2–13goals 1–1
Defence pairs
- bestRistolainen – Sanheim15:50
xG 0.45–0.34 (57%)attempts 13–15goals 1–1
- Sanheim – Provorov2:26
xG 0.13–0.29 (32%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
- Connauton – Attard11:20
xG 0.24–0.42 (36%)attempts 12–9goals 1–0
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.
PHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PHI is favoured, below it ANA. 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 74% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PHI − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).