Sun, Mar 9, 2025·Wells Fargo Center, Philadelphia
New Jersey Devils 3, Philadelphia Flyers 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, New Jersey Devils win this game 73% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NJD | 15 | 111 | 17 | 323 |
| PHI | 08 | 05 | 111 | 124 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 11:10NJDCody GlassAssists: Stefan Noesen, Luke Hughes · Wrist, 0.11 xG1–0
- P2 5:39NJDErik HaulaGWGAssists: Johnathan Kovacevic, Brenden Dillon · Wrist, 0.11 xG2–0
- P3 15:14PHIJamie DrysdaleAssists: Travis Konecny, Tyson Foerster · Wrist, 0.18 xG2–1
- P3 19:42NJDDawson MercerENAssists: Erik Haula, Ondrej Palat · Snap, 0.56 xG3–1
Penalties (2)
- P3 10:32NJDStefan Noesen: Tripping2 min
- P3 18:30PHITravis Sanheim: Cross checking2 min · PPG
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 20:00Hischier won the faceoff against Cates
- 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.
New Jersey Devils
Forward lines
- bestNoesen – Meier – Hischier12:56
xG 1.18–0.48 (71%)attempts 15–9goals 0–1
- Tatar – Lazar – Bastian9:17
xG 0.25–0.04 (85%)attempts 5–4goals 0–0
- Haula – Sprong – Glass8:15
xG 0.19–0.02 (91%)attempts 10–6goals 1–0
- Palat – Bratt – Mercer12:15
xG 0.21–0.49 (30%)attempts 11–17goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestDumoulin – Kovacevic16:22
xG 0.91–0.62 (59%)attempts 11–14goals 0–1
- Dillon – Cholowski12:08
xG 0.52–0.30 (63%)attempts 10–13goals 0–0
- Dillon – Kovacevic2:06
xG 0.11–0.01 (95%)attempts 2–1goals 1–0
Philadelphia Flyers
Forward lines
- bestKonecny – Poehling – Foerster8:06
xG 0.23–0.15 (60%)attempts 6–10goals 1–0
- Konecny – Poehling – Lycksell7:46
xG 0.29–0.29 (50%)attempts 8–7goals 0–0
- Couturier – Tippett – Michkov10:25
xG 0.30–0.35 (46%)attempts 14–9goals 0–2
- Deslauriers – Abols – Pelletier6:11
xG 0.00–0.19 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSanheim – Drysdale3:01
xG 0.23–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–1goals 1–0
- Ristolainen – Sanheim2:00
xG 0.16–0.00 (100%)attempts 9–0goals 0–0
- Ristolainen – Zamula12:28
xG 0.19–0.30 (38%)attempts 13–3goals 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.
PHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PHI is favoured, below it NJD. 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, New Jersey Devils win this game 73% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PHI − NJD), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).