Wed, Oct 26, 2022·Honda Center, Anaheim
Tampa Bay Lightning 4, Anaheim Ducks 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 86% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 210 | 013 | 27 | 430 |
| ANA | 14 | 110 | 07 | 221 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 14:25ANATrevor ZegrasAssists: Dmitry Kulikov, Troy Terry · Slap, 0.08 xG0–1
- P1 17:18TBLMikhail SergachevAssists: Nick Paul, Nick Perbix · Wrist, 0.02 xG1–1
- P1 18:44TBLNikita KucherovAssists: Victor Hedman, Philippe Myers · Slap, 0.08 xG2–1
- P2 16:39ANATroy TerryUnassisted · Wrist, 0.13 xG2–2
- P3 15:33TBLBrandon HagelPPGWGAssists: Mikhail Sergachev, Ross Colton · Snap, 0.06 xG3–2
- P3 19:58TBLNick PaulENAssists: Victor Hedman · Backhand, 0.65 xG4–2
Penalties (5)
- P1 8:10TBLMikhail Sergachev: Cross checking2 min
- P2 3:33ANAKevin Shattenkirk: Tripping2 min
- P3 4:46ANATroy Terry: High sticking2 min
- P3 5:37TBLSteven Stamkos: Tripping2 min
- P3 13:57ANATrevor Zegras: High sticking2 min · PPG
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 20:00Bellemare won the faceoff against Grant
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestKillorn – Stamkos – Paul10:45
xG 0.65–0.36 (64%)attempts 11–11goals 1–1
- Namestnikov – Colton – Koepke6:52
xG 0.37–0.11 (78%)attempts 10–1goals 0–0
- Kucherov – Point – Hagel10:48
xG 0.37–0.27 (58%)attempts 16–4goals 0–0
- Perry – Maroon – Bellemare8:06
xG 0.13–0.08 (61%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHedman – Myers2:03
xG 0.25–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–0goals 1–0
- Hedman – Cernak14:05
xG 0.41–0.35 (54%)attempts 16–11goals 0–1
- Cole – Myers7:36
xG 0.27–0.26 (51%)attempts 11–5goals 0–1
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestTerry – Comtois – Zegras10:29
xG 0.66–0.53 (56%)attempts 10–6goals 2–1
- Henrique – Grant – Silfverberg8:48
xG 0.19–0.15 (55%)attempts 4–10goals 0–0
- Strome – Vatrano – McTavish6:59
xG 0.05–0.18 (21%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- Jones – Lundeström – Leason2:30
xG 0.00–0.15 (0%)attempts 0–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Kulikov – Drysdale12:51
xG 0.17–0.36 (32%)attempts 9–14goals 1–1
- Shattenkirk – Benoit12:34
xG 0.32–0.60 (35%)attempts 4–11goals 1–0
- Fowler – Klingberg18:18
xG 0.53–0.94 (36%)attempts 13–23goals 0–1
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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it TBL. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 86% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).