Sat, Nov 22, 2025·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
Colorado Avalanche 3, Nashville Predators 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Colorado Avalanche win this game 75% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COL | 16 | 010 | 210 | 326 |
| NSH | 016 | 011 | 08 | 035 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 0:15COLBrent BurnsGWGUnassisted · Wrist, 0.02 xG1–0
- P3 18:25COLNathan MacKinnonENAssists: Brock Nelson, Gabriel Landeskog · Wrist, 0.70 xG2–0
- P3 19:09COLJack DruryENAssists: Artturi Lehkonen, Parker Kelly · Wrist, 0.81 xG3–0
Penalties (5)
- P1 14:12COLMartin Necas: Holding2 min
- P2 7:21COLDevon Toews: Tripping2 min
- P2 9:54NSHFilip Forsberg: Interference2 min
- P3 3:40COLDevon Toews: Interference2 min
- P3 6:06NSHMichael McCarron: Interference2 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 20:00Nelson won the faceoff against McCarron
- 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
- bestLandeskog – Lehkonen – MacKinnon6:49
xG 0.76–0.10 (88%)attempts 9–2goals 0–0
- Nelson – Colton – Necas5:18
xG 0.37–0.25 (60%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- Bardakov – Nielsen – Polin5:51
xG 0.17–0.08 (68%)attempts 6–6goals 0–0
- Olofsson – Kelly – Drury8:52
xG 0.24–0.22 (52%)attempts 4–16goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestToews – Malinski2:23
xG 0.47–0.11 (82%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Burns – Manson11:28
xG 0.43–0.40 (52%)attempts 11–9goals 1–0
- Toews – Makar13:05
xG 0.53–0.66 (45%)attempts 9–18goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestMarchessault – McCarron – Bunting10:15
xG 0.82–0.37 (69%)attempts 17–7goals 0–1
- O'Reilly – Forsberg – Evangelista13:50
xG 0.93–0.76 (55%)attempts 19–12goals 0–0
- Stamkos – Haula – Wood7:12
xG 0.10–0.53 (16%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
- Jost – Wiesblatt – Svechkov4:47
xG 0.03–0.48 (5%)attempts 3–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestJosi – Hague13:52
xG 0.72–0.63 (53%)attempts 17–11goals 0–1
- Stastney – Blankenburg10:06
xG 0.84–0.76 (53%)attempts 19–10goals 0–0
- Skjei – Perbix19:00
xG 0.76–0.94 (45%)attempts 23–16goals 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 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 75% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − COL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).