Sat, Oct 3, 2026·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
Dallas Stars 1, Nashville Predators 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Nashville Predators win this game 58% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DAL | 19 | 09 | 012 | 130 |
| NSH | 215 | 05 | 06 | 226 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 0:47DALMiro HeiskanenAssists: Mikko Rantanen, Wyatt Johnston · Wrist, 0.08 xG1–0
- P1 4:46NSHSteven StamkosPPAssists: Ryan O'Reilly, Roman Josi · Snap, 0.11 xG1–1
- P1 15:49NSHNils HoglanderPPGWGAssists: Jack Ahcan, Alexander Kerfoot · Deflected, 0.16 xG1–2
Penalties (4)
- P1 3:36DALArttu Hyry: Interference2 min · PPG
- P1 13:53DALJason Robertson: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P2 2:17NSHRoss Colton: Slashing2 min
- P2 4:29DALEsa Lindell: 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 20:00Bourque won the faceoff against Hyry
- 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.
Dallas Stars
Forward lines
- bestRantanen – Robertson – Johnston3:35
xG 0.21–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Benn – Steel – Hyry5:25
xG 0.16–0.06 (71%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Rantanen – Steel – Johnston5:42
xG 0.18–0.10 (64%)attempts 10–4goals 0–0
- Benn – Hintz – Robertson4:02
xG 0.09–0.03 (76%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHeiskanen – Harley4:40
xG 0.34–0.00 (100%)attempts 9–0goals 0–0
- Lindell – Lundkvist2:06
xG 0.02–0.04 (32%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Lundkvist – Harley14:38
xG 0.75–0.79 (49%)attempts 19–13goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestKerfoot – Drury – Edstrom2:38
xG 0.54–0.09 (86%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Forsberg – Hoglander – Wood7:03
xG 0.55–0.13 (80%)attempts 13–3goals 0–0
- Stamkos – O'Reilly – Kerfoot9:59
xG 0.67–0.40 (62%)attempts 9–12goals 0–1
- Marchessault – Colton – Bourque8:32
xG 0.15–0.32 (32%)attempts 7–13goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestWilsby – Trudeau9:24
xG 0.82–0.33 (71%)attempts 13–9goals 0–0
- Skjei – Perbix14:49
xG 0.95–0.51 (65%)attempts 16–16goals 0–1
- Hague – Wilsby2:20
xG 0.06–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 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.
NSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NSH is favoured, below it DAL. 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, Nashville Predators win this game 58% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − DAL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).