Fri, Nov 14, 2025·Avicii Arena, StockholmNeutral site
Pittsburgh Penguins 1, Nashville Predators 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Nashville Predators win this game 74% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIT | 08 | 12 | 07 | 00 | 117 |
| NSH | 08 | 012 | 18 | 12 | 230 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 13:49PITEvgeni MalkinAssists: Mathew Dumba · Wrist, 0.01 xG1–0
- P3 18:50NSHFilip ForsbergUnassisted · Backhand, 0.11 xG1–1
- OT 0:44NSHSteven StamkosGWGAssists: Brady Skjei · Snap, 0.08 xG1–2
Penalties (3)
- P1 6:50NSHLuke Evangelista: Interference2 min
- P1 18:58PITKris Letang: Roughing2 min
- P2 5:22NSHJustin Barron: High sticking2 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 20:00O'Reilly won the faceoff against Crosby
- 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
- bestCrosby – Rust – Kindel12:26
xG 0.98–0.49 (67%)attempts 13–12goals 0–0
- Malkin – Mantha – Novak10:02
xG 0.28–0.42 (40%)attempts 6–9goals 1–0
- Koppanen – Dewar – Lizotte9:18
xG 0.12–0.33 (27%)attempts 5–8goals 0–0
- Hayes – Tomasino – Koivunen8:37
xG 0.06–0.40 (13%)attempts 4–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKarlsson – Wotherspoon13:59
xG 0.42–0.17 (71%)attempts 11–6goals 0–0
- Letang – Karlsson3:28
xG 0.28–0.29 (49%)attempts 4–6goals 0–0
- Letang – Shea14:58
xG 0.62–0.65 (49%)attempts 10–16goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestStamkos – Haula – Marchessault10:04
xG 0.47–0.14 (77%)attempts 9–5goals 0–0
- O'Reilly – Forsberg – Evangelista10:25
xG 0.59–0.41 (59%)attempts 12–7goals 0–0
- Forsberg – Svechkov – Wood2:31
xG 0.13–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Bunting – Svechkov – Wood8:54
xG 0.37–0.42 (46%)attempts 10–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSkjei – Perbix11:56
xG 0.51–0.30 (63%)attempts 14–5goals 0–0
- Stastney – Wilsby6:56
xG 0.28–0.10 (72%)attempts 8–4goals 0–0
- Barron – Wilsby3:43
xG 0.15–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–0goals 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.
NSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NSH 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, Nashville Predators win this game 74% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − PIT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).