Sun, Nov 14, 2010·St. Pete Times Forum, Tampa
Minnesota Wild 4, Tampa Bay Lightning 1
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 73% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 36 | 07 | 15 | 418 |
| TBL | 116 | 09 | 013 | 138 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 7:16MINCal ClutterbuckPPAssists: Matt Cullen, Martin Havlat · Wrist, 0.05 xG1–0
- P1 11:31TBLMartin St. LouisPPAssists: Brett Clark, Steven Stamkos · Slap, 0.05 xG1–1
- P1 12:55MINJohn MaddenGWGAssists: Martin Havlat, Marek Zidlicky · Wrist, 0.10 xG2–1
- P1 19:30MINAntti MiettinenPPAssists: Andrew Brunette, Mikko Koivu · Wrist, 0.08 xG3–1
- P3 19:11MINEric NystromENAssists: Martin Havlat, John Madden · Wrist, 0.62 xG4–1
Penalties (8)
- P1 6:32TBLSteve Downie: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P1 10:52MINJustin Falk: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P1 14:05MINCal Clutterbuck: Interference2 min
- P1 19:16TBLMattias Ohlund: Boarding2 min · PPG
- P2 8:20MINNick Schultz: Tripping2 min
- P2 19:44TBLSteve Downie: Roughing2 min
- P2 19:44MINMarco Scandella: Slashing2 min
- P3 6:27TBLSteve Downie: Slashing2 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 20:00Moore won the faceoff against Madden
- 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.
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- Cullen – Clutterbuck – Wellman3:47
xG 0.00–0.10 (0%)attempts 0–7goals 0–0
- Brodziak – Earl – Staubitz5:44
xG 0.03–0.20 (12%)attempts 2–7goals 0–0
- Madden – Havlat – Nystrom9:49
xG 0.24–0.52 (32%)attempts 7–12goals 1–0
- Brunette – Miettinen – Koivu12:54
xG 0.05–0.65 (7%)attempts 4–13goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Barker – Falk7:34
xG 0.14–0.21 (39%)attempts 4–9goals 0–0
- Schultz – Barker3:45
xG 0.03–0.12 (20%)attempts 1–2goals 0–0
- Barker – Scandella3:47
xG 0.11–0.32 (25%)attempts 3–6goals 0–0
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestSt. Louis – Downie – Stamkos13:47
xG 0.84–0.19 (82%)attempts 18–8goals 0–0
- Bergenheim – Ritola – Purcell5:24
xG 0.33–0.03 (92%)attempts 6–1goals 0–0
- Hall – Thompson – Tyrell7:08
xG 0.35–0.14 (72%)attempts 11–3goals 0–0
- Malone – Moore – Harju5:43
xG 0.21–0.17 (54%)attempts 7–4goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestClark – Hedman14:42
xG 0.77–0.32 (71%)attempts 17–10goals 0–1
- Ohlund – Jones9:57
xG 0.42–0.10 (80%)attempts 11–5goals 0–0
- Ohlund – Lundin2:29
xG 0.23–0.01 (95%)attempts 4–1goals 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.
TBL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line TBL is favoured, below it MIN. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 73% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (TBL − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).