Wed, Jan 8, 2025·United Center, Chicago
Colorado Avalanche 1, Chicago Blackhawks 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Colorado Avalanche win this game 61% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COL | 114 | 012 | 010 | 136 |
| CHI | 18 | 17 | 15 | 320 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 6:14COLJuuso ParssinenUnassisted · Backhand, 0.06 xG1–0
- P1 16:48CHIIlya MikheyevAssists: Connor Bedard · Wrist, 0.17 xG1–1
- P2 10:17CHIFrank NazarGWGAssists: Colton Dach, Teuvo Teravainen · Wrist, 0.13 xG1–2
- P3 11:54CHIConnor BedardAssists: Tyler Bertuzzi, Seth Jones · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–3
Penalties (3)
- P2 2:41CHICraig Smith: Tripping2 min
- P2 16:05COLJuuso Parssinen: Tripping2 min
- P3 5:37CHIIlya Mikheyev: 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 20:00MacKinnon won the faceoff against Bedard
- 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.
Colorado Avalanche
Forward lines
- bestLehkonen – MacKinnon – Rantanen17:47
xG 1.14–0.41 (74%)attempts 25–11goals 0–0
- Kelly – O'Connor – Kiviranta8:24
xG 0.43–0.25 (64%)attempts 7–6goals 0–0
- Colton – Mittelstadt – Parssinen4:53
xG 0.11–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–3goals 1–0
- Colton – Mittelstadt – Innala4:12
xG 0.17–0.15 (53%)attempts 5–3goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestToews – Makar19:20
xG 0.71–0.21 (77%)attempts 19–13goals 0–0
- Middleton – Malinski2:54
xG 0.19–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- de Haan – Malinski6:18
xG 0.39–0.30 (57%)attempts 8–9goals 0–1
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestBertuzzi – Mikheyev – Bedard11:42
xG 0.61–0.44 (58%)attempts 13–8goals 2–0
- Teravainen – Dach – Nazar8:05
xG 0.29–0.21 (59%)attempts 7–3goals 1–0
- Smith – Donato – Reichel6:33
xG 0.11–0.31 (26%)attempts 4–10goals 0–1
- Foligno – Hall – Dickinson10:27
xG 0.31–0.86 (27%)attempts 9–13goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestJones – Kaiser11:29
xG 0.45–0.39 (54%)attempts 13–10goals 1–0
- Vlasic – Crevier12:16
xG 0.42–0.42 (50%)attempts 13–7goals 0–0
- Crevier – Kaiser3:24
xG 0.08–0.13 (36%)attempts 3–2goals 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.
CHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CHI is favoured, below it COL. 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, Colorado Avalanche win this game 61% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − COL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).