Sun, Mar 24, 2024·Honda Center, Anaheim
Tampa Bay Lightning 3, Anaheim Ducks 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 52% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 05 | 211 | 09 | 12 | 327 |
| ANA | 18 | 012 | 112 | 00 | 232 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 13:49ANARoss JohnstonAssists: Jakob Silfverberg, Ben Meyers · Tip-in, 0.17 xG0–1
- P2 7:50TBLAnthony DuclairAssists: Nick Perbix · Wrist, 0.03 xG1–1
- P2 17:00TBLLuke GlendeningAssists: Austin Watson, Tanner Jeannot · Backhand, 0.08 xG2–1
- P3 2:36ANAPavel MintyukovAssists: Max Jones, Brett Leason · Wrist, 0.06 xG2–2
- OT 0:59TBLAnthony CirelliGWGAssists: Brandon Hagel · Wrist, 0.29 xG3–2
Penalties (7)
- P1 15:59ANAAlex Killorn: Boarding2 min
- P1 16:49TBLDarren Raddysh: Holding2 min
- P2 3:58TBLBrandon Hagel: Holding the stick2 min
- P2 4:57TBLTyler Motte: Tripping2 min
- P2 9:20ANABen Meyers: Cross checking2 min
- P2 13:14ANAFrank Vatrano: Roughing2 min
- P2 17:53TBLMathew Dumba: Tripping2 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 Motte
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestKucherov – Cirelli – Hagel11:15
xG 0.82–0.57 (59%)attempts 14–8goals 0–0
- Stamkos – Kucherov – Cirelli2:37
xG 0.25–0.03 (88%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Watson – Glendening – Jeannot8:13
xG 0.47–0.38 (55%)attempts 8–6goals 1–0
- Duclair – Paul – Hagel2:42
xG 0.22–0.21 (52%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCernak – Perbix2:57
xG 0.10–0.04 (71%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- de Haan – Dumba15:38
xG 0.75–0.71 (51%)attempts 11–15goals 1–1
- Raddysh – Perbix2:28
xG 0.09–0.08 (53%)attempts 4–2goals 1–1
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestSilfverberg – Johnston – Meyers6:18
xG 0.66–0.00 (100%)attempts 7–0goals 1–0
- Killorn – Terry – Carlsson11:08
xG 0.93–0.71 (57%)attempts 14–17goals 0–0
- Strome – Vatrano – McTavish12:42
xG 0.25–0.41 (38%)attempts 10–9goals 0–1
- Jones – Lundeström – Leason7:35
xG 0.01–0.43 (3%)attempts 2–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestFowler – Zellweger13:25
xG 1.08–0.61 (64%)attempts 15–14goals 0–0
- Vaakanainen – Lindstrom14:00
xG 0.54–0.60 (47%)attempts 8–12goals 1–1
- LaCombe – Mintyukov13:47
xG 0.40–0.68 (37%)attempts 13–13goals 0–1
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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it TBL. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 52% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).