Fri, Oct 25, 2024·Rogers Place, Edmonton
Pittsburgh Penguins 0, Edmonton Oilers 4
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Edmonton Oilers win this game 89% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIT | 05 | 012 | 010 | 027 |
| EDM | 019 | 220 | 211 | 450 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 13:00EDMLeon DraisaitlGWGAssists: Viktor Arvidsson, Evan Bouchard · Snap, 0.03 xG0–1
- P2 17:35EDMEvan BouchardAssists: Viktor Arvidsson, Vasily Podkolzin · Snap, 0.10 xG0–2
- P3 0:16EDMRyan Nugent-HopkinsAssists: Zach Hyman, Mattias Ekholm · Snap, 0.20 xG0–3
- P3 7:00EDMMattias EkholmPPAssists: Viktor Arvidsson · Snap, 0.04 xG0–4
Penalties (6)
- P2 17:35PITMichael Bunting: Delaying game unsuccessful challenge2 min
- P3 5:22PITEvgeni Malkin: Interference2 min · PPG
- P3 14:41EDMDarnell Nurse: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P3 14:41PITMarcus Pettersson: Fighting5 min
- P3 14:41EDMDarnell Nurse: Fighting5 min
- P3 18:49EDMConnor McDavid: 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 McDavid
- 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
- Hayes – Acciari – Puljujarvi5:38
xG 0.27–0.23 (54%)attempts 8–6goals 0–1
- Eller – Beauvillier – Puljujarvi2:10
xG 0.10–0.30 (26%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Crosby – Rust – O'Connor12:12
xG 0.97–1.16 (45%)attempts 12–20goals 0–1
- Eller – Beauvillier – Glass8:31
xG 0.43–0.83 (34%)attempts 10–17goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- Graves – St. Ivany13:38
xG 0.62–1.04 (37%)attempts 14–20goals 0–0
- Letang – Pettersson16:29
xG 0.52–1.69 (23%)attempts 11–26goals 0–2
- Karlsson – Grzelcyk18:09
xG 0.75–2.21 (25%)attempts 17–34goals 0–1
Edmonton Oilers
Forward lines
- bestDraisaitl – Arvidsson – Podkolzin11:41
xG 1.57–0.18 (90%)attempts 22–6goals 0–0
- Hyman – Nugent-Hopkins – McDavid12:03
xG 1.07–0.50 (68%)attempts 20–14goals 1–0
- Perry – Janmark – Ryan7:11
xG 0.54–0.45 (54%)attempts 10–6goals 0–0
- Henrique – Skinner – Brown10:52
xG 0.59–0.59 (50%)attempts 14–15goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKulak – Emberson12:21
xG 1.72–0.08 (95%)attempts 22–5goals 1–0
- Kulak – Nurse5:59
xG 0.61–0.00 (100%)attempts 13–1goals 0–0
- Ekholm – Bouchard17:05
xG 1.62–1.17 (58%)attempts 25–18goals 2–0
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.
EDM's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line EDM 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, Edmonton Oilers win this game 89% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (EDM − PIT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).