Sat, Apr 4, 2026·Honda Center, Anaheim
Calgary Flames 5, Anaheim Ducks 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Calgary Flames win this game 61% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGY | 16 | 39 | 15 | 520 |
| ANA | 116 | 010 | 213 | 339 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 10:11ANABeckett SenneckeAssists: Jackson LaCombe, Jacob Trouba · Backhand, 0.16 xG0–1
- P1 13:24CGYJoel FarabeeAssists: Matvei Gridin, Kevin Bahl · Backhand, 0.10 xG1–1
- P2 1:20CGYRyan StromeAssists: Martin Pospisil, Victor Olofsson · Snap, 0.12 xG2–1
- P2 7:49CGYMatvei GridinAssists: Joel Farabee, Hunter Brzustewicz · Wrist, 0.14 xG3–1
- P2 18:44CGYMorgan FrostGWGAssists: Olli Maatta, Blake Coleman · Wrist, 0.16 xG4–1
- P3 7:49ANALeo CarlssonUnassisted · Wrist, 0.06 xG4–2
- P3 9:51ANAMason McTavishPPAssists: Alex Killorn · Snap, 0.09 xG4–3
- P3 18:49CGYMorgan FrostENAssists: Matt Coronato · Wrist, 0.81 xG5–3
Penalties (4)
- P2 11:40ANABeckett Sennecke: Hooking2 min
- P2 16:27CGYZach Whitecloud: Slashing2 min
- P3 8:54CGYMorgan Frost: Holding2 min · PPG
- P3 14:54CGYBlake Coleman: 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 20:00Strome won the faceoff against Carlsson
- 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.
Calgary Flames
Forward lines
- bestFrost – Farabee – Gridin9:52
xG 0.89–0.38 (70%)attempts 14–13goals 2–0
- Backlund – Coleman – Coronato10:03
xG 0.47–0.36 (57%)attempts 10–12goals 0–1
- Sharangovich – Zary – Klapka7:33
xG 0.11–0.33 (25%)attempts 3–8goals 0–0
- Strome – Olofsson – Pospisil9:49
xG 0.36–0.77 (32%)attempts 8–17goals 1–1
Defence pairs
- bestKuznetsov – Parekh10:31
xG 0.66–0.39 (63%)attempts 9–11goals 0–0
- Whitecloud – Kuznetsov2:25
xG 0.17–0.11 (62%)attempts 4–4goals 0–0
- Maatta – Parekh2:16
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 0–3goals 0–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestKillorn – Carlsson – Sennecke9:01
xG 0.64–0.18 (78%)attempts 13–5goals 1–0
- Kreider – Granlund – Terry9:59
xG 0.71–0.43 (62%)attempts 17–11goals 0–1
- Granlund – Carlsson – Sennecke4:34
xG 0.24–0.06 (81%)attempts 5–3goals 1–0
- Killorn – Viel – McTavish2:49
xG 0.08–0.01 (91%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestTrouba – LaCombe12:31
xG 1.07–0.56 (66%)attempts 23–10goals 1–3
- Carlson – Hinds14:43
xG 0.59–0.28 (68%)attempts 27–7goals 0–0
- Helleson – Zellweger6:59
xG 0.67–0.59 (53%)attempts 10–12goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it CGY. 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, Calgary Flames win this game 61% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − CGY), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).