Sat, Jan 28, 2023·Honda Center, Anaheim
Arizona Coyotes 1, Anaheim Ducks 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 60% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARI | 110 | 06 | 016 | 02 | 134 |
| ANA | 016 | 119 | 06 | 14 | 245 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 16:21ARINick RitchieAssists: Christian Fischer, Travis Boyd · Wrist, 0.12 xG1–0
- P2 12:32ANAMax JonesAssists: John Klingberg, Urho Vaakanainen · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–1
- OT 3:34ANATrevor ZegrasGWGAssists: John Klingberg · Wrist, 0.23 xG1–2
Penalties (11)
- P1 12:27ARINick Ritchie: Roughing2 min
- P1 19:45ARIBarrett Hayton: Holding2 min
- P2 9:12ANASam Carrick: Cross checking2 min
- P2 10:03ARIJakob Chychrun: Tripping2 min
- P2 13:28ARIConnor Ingram: Tripping2 min
- P2 13:37ANAAdam Henrique: High sticking2 min
- P2 13:37ANATrevor Zegras: Roughing2 min
- P2 13:37ANATrevor Zegras: Misconduct10 min
- P2 13:37ARIBarrett Hayton: Roughing2 min
- P3 1:38ANARyan Strome: Tripping2 min
- P3 4:39ANAJohn Klingberg: Roughing2 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 20:00McTavish won the faceoff against Bjugstad
- 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.
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestSchmaltz – Keller – Hayton13:38
xG 1.06–0.21 (83%)attempts 22–8goals 0–0
- Kassian – McBain – Maccelli5:59
xG 0.78–0.22 (78%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
- Bjugstad – Crouse – Maccelli2:02
xG 0.01–0.07 (14%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
- Bjugstad – Crouse – Guenther7:48
xG 0.27–0.47 (37%)attempts 7–13goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestChychrun – Välimäki16:43
xG 0.91–0.46 (66%)attempts 21–15goals 0–0
- Nemeth – Moser12:19
xG 0.72–0.69 (51%)attempts 10–19goals 1–0
- Brown – Stecher12:51
xG 1.23–1.20 (50%)attempts 17–20goals 0–1
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- Carrick – Megna – Comtois5:35
xG 0.27–0.23 (54%)attempts 9–3goals 0–0
- Henrique – Terry – Zegras8:45
xG 0.76–0.97 (44%)attempts 16–12goals 0–1
- Vatrano – Jones – McTavish10:45
xG 0.33–0.72 (32%)attempts 13–12goals 0–0
- Silfverberg – Strome – Lundeström8:43
xG 0.38–0.78 (32%)attempts 4–16goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKlingberg – Vaakanainen9:24
xG 0.97–0.62 (61%)attempts 19–7goals 1–0
- Beaulieu – Benoit9:56
xG 0.58–0.34 (63%)attempts 10–11goals 0–0
- Klingberg – Beaulieu2:19
xG 0.11–0.07 (62%)attempts 4–2goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it ARI. 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 60% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − ARI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).