Wed, Jan 21, 2026·Scotiabank Saddledome, Calgary
Pittsburgh Penguins 4, Calgary Flames 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 60% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIT | 111 | 18 | 26 | 425 |
| CGY | 05 | 19 | 05 | 119 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 7:49PITEvgeni MalkinAssists: Ryan Shea, Jack St. Ivany · Tip-in, 0.06 xG1–0
- P2 12:32PITEgor ChinakhovGWGAssists: Tommy Novak, Evgeni Malkin · Snap, 0.12 xG2–0
- P2 19:57CGYYegor SharangovichAssists: Zach Whitecloud, Kevin Bahl · Tip-in, 0.06 xG2–1
- P3 0:50PITBryan RustAssists: Sidney Crosby, Rickard Rakell · Wrap-around, 0.12 xG3–1
- P3 9:19PITTommy NovakAssists: Jack St. Ivany · Backhand, 0.10 xG4–1
Penalties (2)
- P1 2:29CGYRyan Lomberg: Hooking2 min
- P3 1:04PITTommy Novak: Tripping2 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 20:00Backlund 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
- bestMalkin – Novak – Chinakhov12:47
xG 0.92–0.40 (70%)attempts 14–16goals 3–0
- Mantha – Brazeau – Kindel12:57
xG 0.63–0.36 (63%)attempts 12–9goals 0–0
- Acciari – Dewar – Lizotte11:59
xG 0.60–0.47 (56%)attempts 16–12goals 0–0
- Crosby – Rust – Rakell13:25
xG 0.50–0.71 (41%)attempts 10–16goals 1–1
Defence pairs
- bestShea – St. Ivany13:58
xG 1.12–0.43 (72%)attempts 21–14goals 2–0
- Kulak – Shea2:02
xG 0.00–0.06 (4%)attempts 1–1goals 0–1
- Kulak – Wotherspoon17:39
xG 0.69–0.79 (46%)attempts 12–20goals 1–0
Calgary Flames
Forward lines
- bestKirkland – Lomberg – Klapka7:13
xG 0.46–0.14 (76%)attempts 8–3goals 0–0
- Kadri – Zary – Gridin9:54
xG 0.62–0.58 (52%)attempts 13–11goals 0–1
- Backlund – Sharangovich – Coronato12:45
xG 0.50–0.48 (51%)attempts 13–10goals 0–1
- Kadri – Zary – Klapka2:02
xG 0.05–0.13 (28%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestWhitecloud – Bahl19:30
xG 1.41–0.75 (65%)attempts 28–12goals 1–1
- Whitecloud – Kuznetsov2:22
xG 0.03–0.23 (11%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
- Hanley – Brzustewicz14:24
xG 0.29–0.54 (35%)attempts 13–10goals 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.
CGY's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CGY 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 60% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CGY − PIT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).