Sat, Mar 29, 2025·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
Vegas Golden Knights 3, Nashville Predators 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Vegas Golden Knights win this game 81% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VGK | 09 | 111 | 29 | 329 |
| NSH | 09 | 18 | 07 | 124 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 5:53NSHRyan O'ReillyPPAssists: Nick Blankenburg, Filip Forsberg · Tip-in, 0.07 xG0–1
- P2 8:26VGKJack EichelAssists: Shea Theodore, Mark Stone · Wrist, 0.21 xG1–1
- P3 6:25VGKReilly SmithPPGWGAssists: Ivan Barbashev, Victor Olofsson · Backhand, 0.24 xG2–1
- P3 19:15VGKBrett HowdenENAssists: Jack Eichel, Shea Theodore · Wrist, 0.75 xG3–1
Penalties (2)
- P2 5:47VGKWilliam Karlsson: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min · PPG
- P3 4:33NSHJustin Barron: Hooking2 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 20:00O'Reilly won the faceoff against Eichel
- 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.
Vegas Golden Knights
Forward lines
- bestStone – Barbashev – Eichel13:01
xG 1.05–0.34 (75%)attempts 15–12goals 1–0
- Smith – Karlsson – Olofsson11:41
xG 0.43–0.15 (74%)attempts 11–8goals 0–0
- Saad – Roy – Dorofeyev14:50
xG 0.35–0.27 (56%)attempts 8–9goals 0–0
- Pearson – Kolesar – Howden8:17
xG 0.04–0.33 (11%)attempts 5–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHanifin – Whitecloud19:35
xG 1.14–0.23 (83%)attempts 16–11goals 0–0
- McNabb – Theodore15:23
xG 0.65–0.47 (58%)attempts 13–13goals 1–0
- Hague – Korczak18:02
xG 0.27–0.52 (34%)attempts 9–15goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestSissons – L'Heureux – Svechkov2:49
xG 0.15–0.02 (91%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- McCarron – Bellows – Smith5:06
xG 0.16–0.03 (84%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Smith – L'Heureux – Svechkov3:11
xG 0.03–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Stamkos – Marchessault – Bunting12:01
xG 0.35–0.41 (46%)attempts 11–9goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestDel Gaizo – Barron15:59
xG 0.40–0.29 (58%)attempts 16–6goals 0–0
- Englund – Stastney12:27
xG 0.23–0.20 (54%)attempts 6–11goals 0–0
- Skjei – Blankenburg18:02
xG 0.30–1.18 (20%)attempts 11–17goals 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.
NSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NSH is favoured, below it VGK. 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, Vegas Golden Knights win this game 81% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − VGK), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).