EDM beat LAK 8-1, and the chances backed it up: 2.94 expected goals to 1.85. EDM outshot LAK 37 to 22. L. Draisaitl led the way with 4 points (1 G, 3 A). V. Podkolzin had 6 shots on goal against our projection of 1.4. C. Ingram stopped 21 of 22.
Scoring
| 1st | 2nd | 3rd | T | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDM | 2 | 3 | 3 | 8 |
| LAK | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
- 1st 7:25EDMT. Emberson0.05 xG
- 1st 8:19EDMV. Podkolzin0.03 xG
- 1st 12:15LAKW. Foegele0.01 xG
- 2nd 2:59EDMA. Mangiapane0.11 xG
- 2nd 4:58EDMC. McDavid0.07 xG
- 2nd 8:44EDMZ. HymanPP0.04 xG
- 3rd 0:31EDML. DraisaitlPP0.07 xG
- 3rd 5:24EDMJ. Walman0.03 xG
- 3rd 7:36EDMJ. Walman0.05 xG
Team Stats
Expected goals: the chance each unblocked shot had of going in, by our model, added up.
Expected Goals Over the Game
EDM 2.94 xGLAK 1.85 xGGoal
Each step up is a shot: how likely it was to go in. A team well above the other had the better chances, whatever the score.
Shot Map
GoalSavedMissedBlockedBigger: a better chance
Box Score
EDM Skaters
| Player | Pos | G | A | P | SOG | HIT | BLK | +/- | PIM | TOI | PP TOI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L. Draisaitl | C | 1 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | +2 | 0 | 14:52 | 2:40 |
| Z. Hyman | LW | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | +1 | 0 | 17:35 | 2:40 |
| C. McDavid | C | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20:05 | 2:38 |
| M. Savoie | C | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | +2 | 0 | 16:33 | 0:00 |
| A. Mangiapane | LW | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | +2 | 0 | 12:11 | 0:00 |
| J. Roslovic | C | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 1 | +3 | 0 | 18:26 | 0:02 |
| V. Podkolzin | RW | 1 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 2 | 1 | +1 | 0 | 15:50 | 0:00 |
| R. Nugent-Hopkins | C | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | +1 | 0 | 19:22 | 2:38 |
| A. Henrique | C | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | +1 | 0 | 16:37 | 0:00 |
| T. Frederic | C | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15:56 | 0:00 |
| C. Lazar | C | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | +2 | 0 | 11:03 | 0:00 |
| J. Walman | D | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 1 | +3 | 0 | 22:08 | 0:00 |
| D. Nurse | D | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 | +3 | 4 | 21:20 | 0:02 |
| E. Bouchard | D | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | +1 | 0 | 19:38 | 2:40 |
| T. Emberson | D | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | +1 | 0 | 18:27 | 0:00 |
| M. Ekholm | D | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | +1 | 0 | 16:35 | 0:00 |
| S. Stastney | D | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | +1 | 0 | 19:22 | 0:00 |
LAK Skaters
| Player | Pos | G | A | P | SOG | HIT | BLK | +/- | PIM | TOI | PP TOI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| W. Foegele | LW | 1 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | +1 | 0 | 16:51 | 1:19 |
| A. Kempe | RW | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | -3 | 0 | 18:32 | 2:31 |
| Q. Byfield | RW | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 18:23 | 2:13 |
| A. Panarin | LW | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 18:11 | 2:33 |
| A. Kopitar | C | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | -2 | 0 | 17:25 | 2:00 |
| A. Laferriere | RW | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 16:34 | 1:21 |
| C. Perry | RW | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 16:32 | 2:29 |
| T. Moore | LW | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 1 | -2 | 0 | 14:46 | 0:06 |
| T. Ward | RW | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | -2 | 0 | 14:02 | 1:22 |
| J. Malott | LW | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | -2 | 2 | 12:46 | 0:00 |
| A. Turcotte | C | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 12:15 | 0:00 |
| J. Armia | RW | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | +1 | 0 | 4:46 | 0:00 |
| J. Edmundson | D | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | -1 | 0 | 18:15 | 0:06 |
| B. Clarke | D | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 0 | 22:58 | 2:32 |
| B. Dumoulin | D | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | -3 | 0 | 20:12 | 0:00 |
| M. Anderson | D | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | -1 | 0 | 20:05 | 0:00 |
| C. Ceci | D | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | -3 | 0 | 19:32 | 0:00 |
| D. Doughty | D | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 2 | 15:15 | 1:28 |
| Goalie | SA | SV | GA | SV% | TOI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D. Kuemper | 15 | 11 | 4 | .733 | 26:49 | Loss |
| A. Forsberg | 22 | 18 | 4 | .818 | 33:11 |
Lines at 5-on-5
EDM
LAK
From the NHL's shift charts: the players on the ice together most at 5-on-5, with each one's own 5-on-5 time.
Storylines That Played Out
As Tonight had them before puck drop, with what each player did.
How We Did
| We projected | It finished | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | EDM 3.2, LAK 3.1 | EDM 8, LAK 1 |
| Total goals | 6.3 | 9 |
| Shots on goal | EDM 28.8, LAK 26.9 | EDM 37, LAK 22 |
| Win chance | EDM 52% | EDM won |
Players
| Player | SOG projected | SOG | Points projected | Points | Goal chance | Goals |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDM C. McDavid | 3.5 | 3 | 1.50 | 2 | 37% | 1 |
| LAK A. Panarin | 3.2 | 2 | 1.31 | 0 | 37% | 0 |
| EDM Z. Hyman | 3.0 | 3 | 0.83 | 3 | 37% | 1 |
| LAK A. Kempe | 2.9 | 1 | 0.97 | 0 | 35% | 0 |
| EDM L. Draisaitl | 2.8 | 1 | 1.29 | 4 | 40% | 1 |
| EDM E. Bouchard | 2.5 | 1 | 0.85 | 1 | 16% | 0 |
| LAK A. Laferriere | 2.5 | 2 | 0.54 | 0 | 22% | 0 |
| LAK W. Foegele | 2.1 | 4 | 0.44 | 1 | 21% | 1 |
| LAK Q. Byfield | 2.0 | 2 | 0.64 | 0 | 23% | 0 |
| LAK B. Clarke | 1.9 | 0 | 0.58 | 0 | 12% | 0 |
| EDM R. Nugent-Hopkins | 1.9 | 3 | 0.79 | 0 | 23% | 0 |
| LAK T. Moore | 1.9 | 4 | 0.48 | 0 | 20% | 0 |
| EDM D. Nurse | 1.8 | 2 | 0.30 | 1 | 7% | 0 |
| LAK C. Perry | 1.8 | 0 | 0.59 | 0 | 24% | 0 |
| EDM J. Roslovic | 1.7 | 3 | 0.43 | 1 | 18% | 0 |
| EDM J. Walman | 1.7 | 4 | 0.35 | 2 | 9% | 2 |
| EDM M. Ekholm | 1.5 | 1 | 0.38 | 1 | 8% | 0 |
| LAK A. Turcotte | 1.5 | 1 | 0.38 | 0 | 12% | 0 |
| EDM V. Podkolzin | 1.4 | 6 | 0.35 | 1 | 13% | 1 |
| LAK D. Doughty | 1.3 | 1 | 0.47 | 0 | 11% | 0 |
| LAK J. Armia | 1.3 | 1 | 0.37 | 0 | 16% | 0 |
| EDM M. Savoie | 1.3 | 0 | 0.28 | 2 | 12% | 0 |
| LAK T. Ward | 1.2 | 3 | 0.31 | 0 | 13% | 0 |
| LAK A. Kopitar | 1.2 | 0 | 0.70 | 0 | 21% | 0 |
| LAK J. Edmundson | 1.0 | 0 | 0.22 | 1 | 4% | 0 |
| EDM A. Henrique | 1.0 | 2 | 0.24 | 0 | 12% | 0 |
| LAK J. Malott | 1.0 | 0 | 0.20 | 0 | 8% | 0 |
| EDM T. Frederic | 0.9 | 3 | 0.17 | 0 | 10% | 0 |
| EDM A. Mangiapane | 0.8 | 3 | 0.22 | 2 | 11% | 1 |
| LAK B. Dumoulin | 0.8 | 0 | 0.23 | 0 | 4% | 0 |
| LAK C. Ceci | 0.8 | 1 | 0.20 | 0 | 4% | 0 |
| LAK M. Anderson | 0.7 | 0 | 0.20 | 0 | 4% | 0 |
| EDM S. Stastney | 0.7 | 0 | 0.13 | 0 | 3% | 0 |
| EDM C. Lazar | 0.6 | 0 | 0.14 | 0 | 6% | 0 |
| EDM T. Emberson | 0.6 | 2 | 0.16 | 1 | 2% | 1 |
Shots on goal: 16 of 35 players within one of their projection; they took 0.1 more than projected on average.
Our projections as they stood at puck drop. One game says little about a model; Model Notes has how it tests over thousands.