Sat, Oct 22, 2022·Prudential Center, Newark
San Jose Sharks 1, New Jersey Devils 2
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, New Jersey Devils win this game 76% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SJS | 06 | 18 | 08 | 122 |
| NJD | 010 | 220 | 06 | 236 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 13:21NJDYegor SharangovichUnassisted · Backhand, 0.11 xG0–1
- P2 15:43NJDDawson MercerPPGWGAssists: Nico Hischier, Jesper Bratt · Snap, 0.30 xG0–2
- P2 16:15SJSKevin LabancAssists: Scott Harrington, Oskar Lindblom · Wrist, 0.04 xG1–2
Penalties (5)
- P1 13:41SJSMatt Nieto: Hooking2 min
- P1 19:14SJSTomas Hertl: Hooking2 min
- P2 9:30NJDBrendan Smith: Cross checking2 min
- P2 14:29SJSEvgeny Svechnikov: Interference goalkeeper2 min · PPG
- P3 15:41NJDDougie Hamilton: Cross checking2 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 20:00Hischier won the faceoff against Hertl
- 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.
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- Labanc – Svechnikov – Lorentz2:00
xG 0.07–0.07 (49%)attempts 1–3goals 0–0
- Labanc – Svechnikov – Sturm7:22
xG 0.21–0.22 (49%)attempts 9–2goals 0–0
- Nieto – Lindblom – Lorentz7:54
xG 0.07–0.37 (15%)attempts 4–9goals 0–0
- Hertl – Meier – Barabanov11:43
xG 0.58–1.04 (36%)attempts 12–17goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- Vlasic – Benning11:28
xG 0.26–0.68 (28%)attempts 12–10goals 0–0
- Ferraro – Simek11:49
xG 0.25–0.69 (27%)attempts 10–12goals 0–0
- Karlsson – Harrington12:03
xG 0.23–0.68 (26%)attempts 8–15goals 1–0
New Jersey Devils
Forward lines
- bestTatar – Haula – Wood9:16
xG 0.60–0.25 (71%)attempts 10–7goals 0–0
- Sharangovich – Hughes – Mercer10:41
xG 0.32–0.09 (79%)attempts 8–8goals 1–0
- Bastian – McLeod – Sharangovich2:56
xG 0.07–0.13 (35%)attempts 1–4goals 0–1
- Palat – Bratt – Hischier11:50
xG 0.39–0.54 (42%)attempts 8–10goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSeverson – Bahl6:42
xG 0.65–0.04 (94%)attempts 9–2goals 0–0
- Hamilton – Siegenthaler12:32
xG 0.85–0.27 (76%)attempts 14–11goals 1–1
- Graves – Marino12:39
xG 0.45–0.32 (58%)attempts 11–11goals 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.
NJD's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NJD is favoured, below it SJS. 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, New Jersey Devils win this game 76% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NJD − SJS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).