Thu, Apr 2, 2026·Rogers Place, Edmonton
Chicago Blackhawks 1, Edmonton Oilers 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Edmonton Oilers win this game 81% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | 05 | 07 | 16 | 118 |
| EDM | 012 | 216 | 111 | 339 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 5:32EDMAdam HenriqueAssists: Jack Roslovic, Darnell Nurse · Backhand, 0.09 xG0–1
- P2 12:13EDMMatt SavoiePPGWGAssists: Connor McDavid, Evan Bouchard · Snap, 0.21 xG0–2
- P3 5:06CHINick LardisAssists: Connor Bedard, Teuvo Teravainen · Snap, 0.20 xG1–2
- P3 18:59EDMVasily PodkolzinENAssists: Jason Dickinson, Connor Murphy · Snap, 0.72 xG1–3
Penalties (4)
- P1 5:10CHINick Lardis: Tripping2 min
- P1 19:23EDMConnor McDavid: Slashing2 min
- P2 11:00CHILouis Crevier: Holding2 min · PPG
- P2 12:50CHISam Rinzel: 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 20:00Bedard won the faceoff against Dickinson
- 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.
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestTeravainen – Bedard – Lardis6:59
xG 0.73–0.36 (67%)attempts 10–4goals 1–0
- Donato – Greene – Nazar4:51
xG 0.15–0.18 (46%)attempts 3–5goals 0–0
- Teravainen – Slaggert – Boisvert3:30
xG 0.00–0.08 (0%)attempts 1–3goals 0–0
- Greene – Bedard – Lardis4:50
xG 0.00–0.15 (0%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCrevier – Kaiser2:35
xG 0.15–0.09 (63%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- Del Mastro – Korchinski12:34
xG 0.23–0.38 (37%)attempts 10–11goals 0–0
- Kaiser – Rinzel15:28
xG 0.70–0.98 (42%)attempts 14–18goals 1–0
Edmonton Oilers
Forward lines
- bestHenrique – Jones – Samanski7:25
xG 0.33–0.00 (100%)attempts 12–2goals 0–0
- McDavid – Podkolzin – Savoie10:34
xG 0.90–0.58 (61%)attempts 13–15goals 0–0
- Dickinson – Kapanen – Frederic10:25
xG 0.60–0.35 (63%)attempts 5–9goals 0–0
- Hyman – Nugent-Hopkins – Roslovic9:21
xG 0.46–0.57 (45%)attempts 14–9goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestEkholm – Bouchard13:41
xG 0.94–0.50 (65%)attempts 18–14goals 0–0
- Walman – Emberson14:33
xG 0.50–0.26 (66%)attempts 15–10goals 0–0
- Murphy – Nurse16:52
xG 0.95–0.76 (56%)attempts 15–14goals 1–1
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.
EDM's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line EDM is favoured, below it CHI. 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, Edmonton Oilers win this game 81% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (EDM − CHI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).