Tue, Mar 3, 2026·Honda Center, Anaheim
Colorado Avalanche 5, Anaheim Ducks 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Colorado Avalanche win this game 52% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COL | 27 | 110 | 29 | 526 |
| ANA | 08 | 18 | 012 | 128 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 11:33COLCale MakarAssists: Valeri Nichushkin, Brock Nelson · Snap, 0.14 xG1–0
- P1 14:05COLMartin NecasPPGWGAssists: Brock Nelson, Cale Makar · Slap, 0.10 xG2–0
- P2 4:50ANACutter GauthierAssists: Jackson LaCombe · Snap, 0.07 xG2–1
- P2 15:03COLParker KellyAssists: Cale Makar, Jack Drury · Snap, 0.06 xG3–1
- P3 4:35COLGabriel LandeskogAssists: Nathan MacKinnon · Slap, 0.10 xG4–1
- P3 10:06COLParker KellyAssists: Jack Drury, Brett Kulak · Wrist, 0.06 xG5–1
Penalties (6)
- P1 3:00COLRoss Colton: Interference2 min
- P1 5:35COLMartin Necas: Interference2 min
- P1 13:10ANAJacob Trouba: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P1 16:20ANAJacob Trouba: Slashing2 min
- P2 2:30ANAChris Kreider: Interference goalkeeper2 min
- P2 6:41COLJosh Manson: 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 20:00MacKinnon won the faceoff against Poehling
- 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 – MacKinnon – Necas13:36
xG 0.86–0.24 (78%)attempts 14–9goals 1–0
- Bardakov – Brindley – Polin6:11
xG 0.17–0.02 (90%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
- Nelson – Nichushkin – Colton7:22
xG 0.52–0.59 (47%)attempts 11–7goals 1–0
- Olofsson – Kelly – Drury9:36
xG 0.58–0.87 (40%)attempts 9–14goals 2–0
Defence pairs
- bestKulak – Malinski13:38
xG 0.83–0.45 (65%)attempts 14–10goals 1–0
- Toews – Makar12:52
xG 0.47–0.34 (58%)attempts 6–10goals 2–0
- Burns – Manson16:01
xG 1.08–1.01 (52%)attempts 21–15goals 1–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestKillorn – McTavish – Sennecke5:19
xG 0.60–0.26 (69%)attempts 8–3goals 0–0
- Killorn – Poehling – Sennecke2:11
xG 0.24–0.14 (63%)attempts 3–1goals 0–1
- Johnston – Harkins – Washe2:27
xG 0.02–0.04 (38%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Harkins – Viel – Poehling4:55
xG 0.23–0.31 (43%)attempts 3–10goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestHelleson – Mintyukov10:57
xG 0.80–0.31 (72%)attempts 11–12goals 0–0
- Trouba – Mintyukov2:06
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 0–0goals 0–0
- Gudas – Zellweger8:55
xG 0.35–0.41 (46%)attempts 8–9goals 0–2
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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA 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 52% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − COL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).