Sat, Dec 16, 2023·Mullett Arena, Tempe
Buffalo Sabres 0, Arizona Coyotes 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Arizona Coyotes win this game 82% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | 09 | 011 | 08 | 028 |
| ARI | 09 | 17 | 16 | 222 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 15:12ARIClayton KellerGWGAssists: Alexander Kerfoot · Wrist, 0.21 xG0–1
- P3 9:36ARILiam O'BrienAssists: Logan Cooley · Backhand, 0.08 xG0–2
Penalties (5)
- P1 10:43BUFCasey Mittelstadt: Holding2 min
- P2 7:36ARITroy Stecher: Tripping2 min
- P2 18:16BUFMattias Samuelsson: Holding2 min
- P3 19:34ARIMathew Dumba: Roughing2 min
- P3 19:34BUFZach Benson: 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 20:00Thompson 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.
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- bestMittelstadt – Cozens – Peterka11:40
xG 0.67–0.31 (68%)attempts 9–10goals 0–0
- Okposo – Olofsson – Krebs2:13
xG 0.24–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–0goals 0–0
- Tuch – Thompson – Benson12:06
xG 0.80–0.63 (56%)attempts 13–13goals 0–1
- Okposo – Robinson – Krebs6:32
xG 0.17–0.58 (23%)attempts 11–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestClifton – Power5:09
xG 0.33–0.01 (97%)attempts 7–4goals 0–0
- Samuelsson – Johnson2:53
xG 0.33–0.08 (80%)attempts 4–3goals 0–1
- Jokiharju – Dahlin5:50
xG 0.42–0.20 (68%)attempts 6–4goals 0–0
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestKerfoot – Schmaltz – Keller11:47
xG 1.25–0.46 (73%)attempts 17–5goals 1–0
- O'Brien – Sanford – Cooley7:41
xG 0.42–0.19 (69%)attempts 6–11goals 1–0
- Bjugstad – Crouse – Maccelli11:27
xG 0.33–0.40 (45%)attempts 12–11goals 0–0
- Zucker – Carcone – McBain9:19
xG 0.38–0.81 (32%)attempts 7–16goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestStecher – Välimäki14:37
xG 1.12–0.58 (66%)attempts 16–10goals 2–0
- Dumba – Moser15:13
xG 0.68–0.51 (57%)attempts 15–12goals 0–0
- Dermott – Kesselring13:09
xG 0.48–0.95 (34%)attempts 12–22goals 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.
ARI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ARI is favoured, below it BUF. 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, Arizona Coyotes win this game 82% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ARI − BUF), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).