Wed, Jan 21, 2026·Ball Arena, Denver
Anaheim Ducks 2, Colorado Avalanche 1 (SO)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Colorado Avalanche win this game 90% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | SO | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 04 | 16 | 03 | 03 | 2 | 216 |
| COL | 09 | 011 | 118 | 03 | 0 | 141 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 1:27ANAJeffrey VielAssists: Cutter Gauthier, Radko Gudas · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–0
- P3 16:21COLArtturi LehkonenAssists: Brock Nelson, Brent Burns · Snap, 0.10 xG1–1
Shootout
- 1. ANA Mikael Granlund scored
- 2. COL Brock Nelson stopped
- 3. ANA Beckett Sennecke stopped
- 4. COL Martin Necas stopped
- 5. ANA Cutter Gauthier scored
Penalties (3)
- P1 2:43ANARoss Johnston: Tripping2 min
- P1 12:50COLJack Drury: Holding2 min
- P2 18:02ANADrew Helleson: Holding2 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 Granlund
- 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.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- Viel – Poehling – Gauthier11:24
xG 0.34–0.33 (51%)attempts 13–9goals 1–1
- Kreider – Strome – Harkins9:55
xG 0.15–0.28 (35%)attempts 4–13goals 0–0
- Killorn – Granlund – Sennecke10:56
xG 0.11–1.34 (7%)attempts 7–21goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Helleson – Mintyukov14:10
xG 0.43–0.71 (37%)attempts 11–12goals 0–1
- Gudas – Zellweger9:07
xG 0.30–0.66 (32%)attempts 6–15goals 1–0
- Trouba – LaCombe17:57
xG 0.17–1.65 (9%)attempts 12–28goals 0–0
Colorado Avalanche
Forward lines
- bestNelson – Lehkonen – Nichushkin9:43
xG 0.99–0.13 (88%)attempts 18–4goals 1–0
- Colton – Drury – Brindley4:55
xG 0.53–0.02 (96%)attempts 8–1goals 0–0
- Nelson – MacKinnon – Necas2:16
xG 0.25–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–0goals 0–0
- MacKinnon – Olofsson – Necas14:12
xG 0.40–0.21 (66%)attempts 15–15goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestMakar – Malinski14:36
xG 0.74–0.17 (81%)attempts 24–11goals 0–1
- Girard – Makar5:57
xG 0.33–0.05 (86%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
- Burns – Manson10:51
xG 0.34–0.10 (77%)attempts 10–7goals 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.
COL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line COL is favoured, below it ANA. 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 90% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (COL − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).