Thu, Feb 5, 2026·Xfinity Mobile Arena, Philadelphia
Ottawa Senators 2, Philadelphia Flyers 1 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Ottawa Senators win this game 66% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OTT | 08 | 113 | 05 | 11 | 227 |
| PHI | 02 | 06 | 17 | 01 | 116 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 9:55OTTNick CousinsAssists: Shane Pinto, Michael Amadio · Wrist, 0.17 xG1–0
- P3 18:46PHIJamie DrysdaleAssists: Bobby Brink, Trevor Zegras · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–1
- OT 0:47OTTTim StützleGWGAssists: Brady Tkachuk · Backhand, 0.21 xG2–1
Penalties (2)
- P1 19:19OTTDrake Batherson: Hooking2 min
- P2 5:52PHISean Couturier: Hooking2 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 20:00Dvorak won the faceoff against Cozens
- 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.
Ottawa Senators
Forward lines
- bestCousins – Amadio – Pinto10:56
xG 0.72–0.05 (93%)attempts 10–5goals 1–0
- Eller – Zetterlund – Halliday3:48
xG 0.25–0.05 (82%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Tkachuk – Cozens – Greig11:29
xG 0.47–0.37 (56%)attempts 8–12goals 0–0
- Giroux – Batherson – Stützle10:06
xG 0.16–0.61 (21%)attempts 5–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSpence – Kleven11:31
xG 0.55–0.14 (79%)attempts 17–9goals 0–0
- Sanderson – Zub16:22
xG 0.85–0.60 (59%)attempts 11–13goals 0–0
- Jensen – Chabot20:10
xG 0.68–0.77 (47%)attempts 9–21goals 1–0
Philadelphia Flyers
Forward lines
- bestCouturier – Tippett – Grebenkin2:45
xG 0.38–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Dvorak – Konecny – Zegras9:08
xG 0.42–0.08 (84%)attempts 17–2goals 0–0
- Cates – Brink – Michkov9:44
xG 0.31–0.34 (48%)attempts 10–7goals 0–0
- Couturier – Hathaway – Grundstrom6:00
xG 0.15–0.21 (42%)attempts 6–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestRistolainen – Sanheim18:19
xG 0.66–0.16 (80%)attempts 22–5goals 0–0
- Seeler – Juulsen10:03
xG 0.58–0.76 (43%)attempts 7–14goals 0–1
- York – Drysdale17:31
xG 0.24–0.57 (30%)attempts 12–11goals 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.
PHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PHI is favoured, below it OTT. 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, Ottawa Senators win this game 66% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PHI − OTT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).