PHI @ PIT
2026-01-15 · final 3–6 · what happened, next to what the engine said before puck drop
What happened
PHI attacks the left net, PIT the right — every unblocked attempt the game produced: × goals, • on net, ◦ missed (hover a marker for the shooter and its xG). To compare against the pregame call, switch the Surface to the engine's predicted-xG map — the shots land on top of where the engine expected the game to be played.
| PHI | PIT | |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Goals | 6 |
| 3.64 | Expected goals (xG) | 4.15 |
| 2.53 | 5v5 xG | 3.23 |
| 1.05 | Power-play xG | 0.92 |
| 34 | Shots on goal | 30 |
| 72 | Shot attempts | 56 |
Counts come from the shot table behind the maps: empty-net attempts and the shootout are excluded, so the goals row can trail the official final by an empty-netter or the shootout's deciding goal.
Goals
| Team | Scorer | Period | Strength | xG |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIT | Justin Brazeau | 1 | PP | 0.12 |
| PIT | Bryan Rust | 1 | PP | 0.03 |
| PHI | Rodrigo Abols | 2 | 5v5 | 0.09 |
| PIT | Egor Chinakhov | 2 | 5v5 | 0.20 |
| PIT | Blake Lizotte | 2 | 5v5 | 0.25 |
| PHI | Nick Seeler | 3 | 5v5 | 0.02 |
| PHI | Matvei Michkov | 3 | 5v5 | 0.08 |
| PIT | Sidney Crosby | 3 | PP | 0.11 |
| PIT | Connor Dewar | 3 | 5v5 | 0.11 |
The prediction, scored
Before puck drop the engine made PIT a 64.6% favorite, expecting a 2.34–3.23 game — PIT won 3–6, so the call landed. Every number in this section was issued before the game and is never re-graded.
| pred. xG | actual xG | pred. 5v5 | actual 5v5 | pred. ST | actual PP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PHI | 2.34 | 3.64 | 1.63 | 2.53 | 0.54 | 1.05 |
| PIT | 3.23 | 4.15 | 2.29 | 3.23 | 0.70 | 0.92 |
Predicted 5v5 / special-teams portions come from the map's strength splits (one shared scale per team pins the all-strengths total to its expected goals), so they don't sum exactly — the remainder is 4v4, 3v3, and other mixed states. The actual PP column is power-play xG only, the same bucket the map's special-teams view draws.
The pregame score grid
The likeliest finals the engine saw before the game, with what actually happened marked — ■ PHI · ■ PIT.
| Likeliest finals (PHI–PIT) | probability | |
|---|---|---|
| 2–3 | 5.9% | |
| 2–2 | 5.4% | tied after regulation — OT/SO decides |
| 1–3 | 5.0% | |
| 2–4 | 4.7% | |
| 1–2 | 4.6% | |
| 3–6 | 1.3% | what happened |
Scoreline odds treat the two teams' totals as independent — the engine's known simplification (it slightly under-counts regulation ties; the correlation term is registered v1.1 work). The OT/SO layer is a separate fitted model and is already inside the headline win probability.
The pregame read
The engine made PIT a 64.6% favorite — PIT controls 58.0% of the predicted xG. Of PHI's 2.34 expected goals, 1.63 should come at 5v5 and 0.54 on the power play; PIT projects 2.29 at 5v5 and 0.70 on the power play. The logistic challenger put the home side at 64.1%, Elo at 58.0%.
Tale of the tape
How each team fares on its own, season to date: per-game xG rates with league rank (of 32). Rank 1 is best on every row — orange ranks sit in the top third of the league, gray in the bottom third.
| PHI | PIT | |
|---|---|---|
| 2.79 (20th) | Offense xG for / game |
3.05 (8th) |
| 2.67 (7th) | Defense xG against / game |
2.96 (20th) |
| 0.70 (13th) | Power play PP xG / game |
0.64 (21st) |
| 0.63 (9th) | Penalty kill PP xG conceded / game |
0.64 (13th) |
Season-to-date form as of the site's latest build, shown for context — the ratings the engine actually used were its own as-of-game-day state. Replay this matchup in the lab →