Tue, Feb 28, 2023·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
Pittsburgh Penguins 3, Nashville Predators 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 76% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIT | 09 | 017 | 38 | 334 |
| NSH | 017 | 05 | 13 | 125 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P3 7:01NSHMark JankowskiUnassisted · Wrist, 0.19 xG0–1
- P3 11:00PITSidney CrosbyAssists: Brock McGinn, Rickard Rakell · Wrist, 0.14 xG1–1
- P3 18:21PITJason ZuckerGWGUnassisted · Wrist, 0.11 xG2–1
- P3 19:53PITBryan RustENAssists: Jake Guentzel, Brian Dumoulin · Backhand, 0.73 xG3–1
Penalties (5)
- P1 13:34PITJake Guentzel: Hooking2 min
- P2 0:45NSHMikael Granlund: Tripping2 min
- P2 4:28NSHCal Foote: Interference2 min
- P3 2:39NSHCole Smith: Holding2 min
- P3 8:29PITJan Rutta: Slashing2 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 20:00Crosby won the faceoff against Glass
- 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.
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestCrosby – Rakell – Guentzel14:23
xG 1.16–0.50 (70%)attempts 26–12goals 0–0
- Carter – McGinn – Heinen7:29
xG 0.62–0.17 (78%)attempts 8–7goals 0–0
- Archibald – Blueger – O'Connor7:46
xG 0.21–0.10 (68%)attempts 8–4goals 0–0
- Malkin – Zucker – Rust10:00
xG 0.40–0.67 (37%)attempts 8–10goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestLetang – Dumoulin14:24
xG 0.67–0.43 (61%)attempts 24–9goals 0–1
- Joseph – Rutta9:32
xG 0.63–0.43 (60%)attempts 11–8goals 0–0
- Petry – Pettersson13:02
xG 0.66–0.56 (54%)attempts 12–14goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- Duchene – Granlund – Novak2:01
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 0–1goals 0–0
- Glass – Sherwood – Tomasino2:04
xG 0.00–0.06 (0%)attempts 0–1goals 0–0
- Jankowski – Sanford – Evangelista8:09
xG 0.36–0.42 (46%)attempts 7–18goals 1–0
- Novak – Sherwood – Tomasino6:31
xG 0.32–0.45 (42%)attempts 9–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMcDonagh – Josi2:52
xG 0.30–0.13 (71%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- McDonagh – Carrier12:21
xG 0.60–0.54 (53%)attempts 8–10goals 1–1
- Lauzon – Foote8:08
xG 0.05–0.31 (15%)attempts 2–11goals 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.
NSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NSH is favoured, below it PIT. 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 76% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − PIT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).