Sat, Nov 2, 2024·Little Caesars Arena, Detroit
Buffalo Sabres 1, Detroit Red Wings 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Buffalo Sabres win this game 56% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | 112 | 07 | 013 | 132 |
| DET | 07 | 29 | 07 | 223 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 11:39BUFAlex TuchSHUnassisted · Snap, 0.16 xG1–0
- P2 7:49DETDylan LarkinPPAssists: Patrick Kane · Snap, 0.14 xG1–1
- P2 14:38DETDylan LarkinPPGWGAssists: Alex DeBrincat, Lucas Raymond · Snap, 0.22 xG1–2
Penalties (6)
- P1 2:35DETPatrick Kane: Hooking2 min
- P1 10:57BUFBeck Malenstyn: Holding2 min
- P1 18:29DETBen Chiarot: Slashing2 min
- P2 7:14BUFOwen Power: Cross checking2 min · PPG
- P2 14:25BUFJack Quinn: Delaying game puck over glass2 min · PPG
- P3 19:58BUFJordan Greenway: 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 20:00Compher won the faceoff against Thompson
- 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
- bestLafferty – Malenstyn – Krebs7:46
xG 0.43–0.11 (80%)attempts 10–7goals 0–0
- Tuch – Thompson – Peterka5:55
xG 0.30–0.15 (67%)attempts 7–4goals 0–0
- Cozens – Quinn – Peterka6:42
xG 0.19–0.09 (69%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Zucker – Tuch – Thompson7:49
xG 0.33–0.24 (58%)attempts 9–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestDahlin – Byram17:09
xG 0.96–0.21 (82%)attempts 27–6goals 0–0
- Bryson – Power2:27
xG 0.13–0.03 (80%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- Samuelsson – Dahlin2:25
xG 0.24–0.27 (47%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
Detroit Red Wings
Forward lines
- bestFischer – Rasmussen – Veleno9:12
xG 0.76–0.36 (68%)attempts 10–10goals 0–0
- Tarasenko – Berggren – Kasper12:16
xG 0.32–0.27 (55%)attempts 11–10goals 0–0
- Kane – Larkin – DeBrincat11:06
xG 0.35–0.43 (44%)attempts 13–12goals 0–0
- Copp – Compher – Raymond11:22
xG 0.14–0.73 (16%)attempts 9–19goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestPetry – Chiarot14:36
xG 1.01–0.66 (61%)attempts 14–15goals 0–0
- Seider – Edvinsson15:13
xG 0.61–0.81 (43%)attempts 20–20goals 0–0
- Gustafsson – Johansson15:01
xG 0.21–0.44 (32%)attempts 11–17goals 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.
DET's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line DET 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, Buffalo Sabres win this game 56% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (DET − BUF), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).