Mon, Dec 4, 2023·Wells Fargo Center, Philadelphia
Pittsburgh Penguins 1, Philadelphia Flyers 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Philadelphia Flyers win this game 56% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIT | 114 | 011 | 05 | 02 | 132 |
| PHI | 08 | 114 | 07 | 14 | 233 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 19:14PITSidney CrosbyAssists: Jake Guentzel, Bryan Rust · Wrist, 0.08 xG1–0
- P2 9:46PHITyson FoersterAssists: Travis Konecny, Rasmus Ristolainen · Wrist, 0.04 xG1–1
- OT 3:55PHISean CouturierGWGAssists: Travis Konecny, Travis Sanheim · Wrist, 0.09 xG1–2
Penalties (4)
- P1 16:04PHICam York: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P2 3:26PHIJoel Farabee: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P3 14:43PITRadim Zohorna: Tripping2 min
- P3 15:37PHICam York: Holding2 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 20:00Couturier won the faceoff against Crosby
- 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 – Rust – Guentzel14:11
xG 0.77–0.49 (61%)attempts 16–16goals 1–1
- Malkin – Smith – O'Connor12:21
xG 0.77–0.65 (54%)attempts 10–9goals 0–0
- Eller – Nylander – Zohorna8:36
xG 0.46–0.34 (58%)attempts 12–11goals 0–0
- Carter – Harkins – Koppanen6:49
xG 0.20–0.16 (55%)attempts 6–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKarlsson – Pettersson19:34
xG 0.92–0.40 (70%)attempts 25–11goals 1–0
- Graves – Ludvig5:01
xG 0.39–0.16 (71%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
- Shea – Ludvig6:04
xG 0.31–0.35 (47%)attempts 8–9goals 0–0
Philadelphia Flyers
Forward lines
- bestTippett – Frost – Brink8:13
xG 0.42–0.07 (86%)attempts 12–7goals 0–0
- Atkinson – Laughton – Farabee10:27
xG 0.65–0.58 (53%)attempts 13–12goals 0–0
- Couturier – Konecny – Foerster11:35
xG 0.42–0.44 (49%)attempts 15–11goals 1–0
- Deslauriers – Hathaway – Poehling5:33
xG 0.05–0.36 (12%)attempts 5–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSeeler – Walker15:21
xG 0.80–0.25 (76%)attempts 18–10goals 0–0
- Staal – Ristolainen8:37
xG 0.19–0.20 (48%)attempts 7–7goals 0–0
- Sanheim – York18:32
xG 0.71–1.02 (41%)attempts 19–21goals 1–1
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.
PHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PHI 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, Philadelphia Flyers win this game 56% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PHI − PIT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).