Sat, Jan 6, 2024·PPG Paints Arena, Pittsburgh
Buffalo Sabres 3, Pittsburgh Penguins 1
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 65% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | 18 | 015 | 29 | 332 |
| PIT | 017 | 012 | 112 | 141 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 2:53BUFAlex TuchAssists: Connor Clifton, Tage Thompson · Snap, 0.09 xG1–0
- P3 7:49PITRickard RakellPPAssists: Erik Karlsson, Evgeni Malkin · Tip-in, 0.15 xG1–1
- P3 15:22BUFZemgus GirgensonsGWGAssists: Eric Robinson, Mattias Samuelsson · Wrist, 0.25 xG2–1
- P3 18:24BUFRasmus DahlinUnassisted · Wrist, 0.00 xG3–1
Penalties (8)
- P2 0:26BUFAlex Tuch: Tripping2 min
- P2 9:07BUFHenri Jokiharju: Holding2 min
- P2 12:51PITNoel Acciari: Hooking2 min
- P2 19:15BUFMattias Samuelsson: Boarding2 min
- P2 19:40PITSidney Crosby: Interference2 min
- P3 3:04PITJansen Harkins: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P3 5:57BUFConnor Clifton: Interference2 min · PPG
- P3 5:57BUFZemgus Girgensons: 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 20:00Thompson 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.
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- bestGirgensons – Robinson – Krebs6:56
xG 0.50–0.34 (59%)attempts 13–8goals 1–0
- Greenway – Mittelstadt – Benson10:02
xG 0.30–0.41 (42%)attempts 9–14goals 0–0
- Skinner – Tuch – Thompson11:50
xG 0.74–0.95 (44%)attempts 15–19goals 2–0
- Cozens – Quinn – Peterka6:01
xG 0.19–0.51 (28%)attempts 5–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Samuelsson – Dahlin2:14
xG 0.01–0.01 (39%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
- Johnson – Power8:10
xG 0.32–0.65 (33%)attempts 6–11goals 0–0
- Jokiharju – Dahlin14:27
xG 0.46–0.79 (37%)attempts 13–22goals 1–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestCrosby – Rakell – Guentzel11:56
xG 0.83–0.19 (81%)attempts 23–11goals 0–1
- Malkin – Rust – O'Connor2:20
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Carter – Harkins – Acciari6:32
xG 0.34–0.41 (45%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
- Malkin – Smith – Rust6:47
xG 0.23–0.31 (42%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestLetang – Pettersson16:14
xG 1.00–0.50 (67%)attempts 28–13goals 0–0
- Pettersson – Joseph2:27
xG 0.07–0.04 (66%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- Karlsson – Joseph11:22
xG 0.87–0.83 (51%)attempts 17–15goals 0–2
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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 65% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − BUF), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).