Sun, Nov 13, 2011·Honda Center, Anaheim
Minnesota Wild 3, Anaheim Ducks 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 52% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 315 | 08 | 03 | 326 |
| ANA | 07 | 113 | 114 | 234 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 6:09MINKyle BrodziakAssists: Darroll Powe, Nick Johnson · Tip-in, 0.22 xG1–0
- P1 16:11MINMatt CullenAssists: Cal Clutterbuck, Nate Prosser · Wrist, 0.10 xG2–0
- P1 19:31MINJared SpurgeonGWGAssists: Pierre-Marc Bouchard, Matt Cullen · Slap, 0.05 xG3–0
- P2 2:15ANACam FowlerAssists: Francois Beauchemin, Bobby Ryan · Wrist, 0.04 xG3–1
- P3 19:11ANACam FowlerUnassisted · Wrist, 0.08 xG3–2
Penalties (9)
- P1 2:21MINNick Johnson: Tripping2 min
- P1 9:46ANAPeter Holland: Holding2 min
- P2 0:23MINMikko Koivu: Interference2 min
- P2 1:28ANACorey Perry: Tripping2 min
- P2 9:35ANASaku Koivu: Elbowing2 min
- P2 9:35MINJared Spurgeon: Slashing2 min
- P2 9:46MINKyle Brodziak: Slashing2 min
- P2 18:15ANACorey Perry: Interference goalkeeper2 min
- P3 2:45ANAKurtis Foster: Interference2 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 20:00Koivu won the faceoff against Koivu
- 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
- bestPeters – Staubitz – Gillies5:44
xG 0.58–0.20 (74%)attempts 8–3goals 0–0
- Cullen – Bouchard – Clutterbuck7:33
xG 0.37–0.19 (66%)attempts 8–6goals 2–0
- Brodziak – Johnson – Powe10:34
xG 0.83–0.94 (47%)attempts 12–17goals 1–0
- Heatley – Koivu – Setoguchi11:44
xG 0.26–0.45 (37%)attempts 11–14goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestZidlicky – Stoner13:05
xG 1.04–0.67 (61%)attempts 14–15goals 1–0
- Schultz – Prosser13:03
xG 0.83–0.66 (56%)attempts 19–13goals 1–0
- Falk – Spurgeon11:23
xG 0.19–0.88 (18%)attempts 8–18goals 1–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestSelanne – Koivu – Cogliano11:56
xG 0.86–0.26 (76%)attempts 17–11goals 0–1
- Gordon – Beleskey – Macenauer8:55
xG 0.54–0.13 (81%)attempts 14–5goals 0–0
- Getzlaf – Perry – Ryan14:31
xG 0.62–0.68 (48%)attempts 14–14goals 0–1
- McMillan – Holland – Smith-Pelly3:10
xG 0.20–0.57 (26%)attempts 3–6goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestFoster – Brookbank6:41
xG 0.57–0.23 (71%)attempts 10–6goals 0–0
- Beauchemin – Foster2:13
xG 0.33–0.19 (64%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Foster – Fowler4:04
xG 0.16–0.11 (60%)attempts 3–4goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 52% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).