Skip to content
Ice Lab

Thu, Apr 4, 2013·STAPLES Center, Los Angeles

Minnesota Wild 0, Los Angeles Kings 3

Expected result

Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 50% of the time.

LAK winsMIN wins

By period

Goals and shots on goal in each period.

TeamP1P2P3Total
MIN0606011023
LAK261305314

Goals, with shots on goal in grey.

Scoring

Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.

  1. P1 1:29LAKJustin WilliamsGWGUnassisted · Snap, 0.09 xG0–1
  2. P1 3:07LAKJeff CarterAssists: Mike Richards, Drew Doughty · Wrist, 0.09 xG0–2
  3. P2 3:52LAKJustin WilliamsAssists: Anze Kopitar, Robyn Regehr · Slap, 0.03 xG0–3
Penalties (3)
  1. P1 18:14MINTorrey Mitchell: Tripping2 min
  2. P2 10:14LAKJordan Nolan: Interference2 min
  3. P2 12:35MINJared Spurgeon: Hooking2 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.

MIN00 SOG · 0.0 xG

20:00

P1

0.0 xG · 0 SOG0LAK
43% to win57% to win
← MIN attackLAK attack →
  1. P1 20:00Koivu won the faceoff against Richards
  • Goal
  • Shot
  • Miss
  • Block
  • Hit
  • Takeaway
  • Giveaway
  • Faceoff
  • Penalty

The numbers

Team totals, side by side.

MINLAK
23Shots on goal14
1.6Expected goals1.6
39Shot attempts37
25Faceoffs won23
1Power plays2
4Penalty minutes2
32Hits31
9Blocked shots9
9Giveaways8
4Takeaways3

Line combinations that worked

Model-based

Each 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

  1. bestKoivu – Pominville – Parise15:40

    xG 0.70–0.40 (63%)attempts 13–8goals 0–1

  2. Bouchard – Brodziak – Setoguchi10:56

    xG 0.46–0.40 (53%)attempts 10–6goals 0–1

  3. Clutterbuck – Coyle – Granlund10:22

    xG 0.13–0.10 (55%)attempts 4–6goals 0–0

  4. Rupp – Konopka – Mitchell8:53

    xG 0.06–0.22 (21%)attempts 6–6goals 0–0

Defence pairs

  1. bestSuter – Brodin21:20

    xG 0.91–0.28 (77%)attempts 19–6goals 0–1

  2. Stoner – Spurgeon16:19

    xG 0.25–0.35 (42%)attempts 9–10goals 0–0

  3. Clark – Gilbert13:26

    xG 0.29–0.69 (30%)attempts 8–15goals 0–2

Los Angeles Kings

Forward lines

  1. bestWilliams – Brown – Kopitar13:39

    xG 0.42–0.27 (61%)attempts 14–8goals 2–0

  2. Stoll – Lewis – King7:42

    xG 0.30–0.20 (60%)attempts 3–7goals 0–0

  3. Stoll – Richardson – Lewis5:11

    xG 0.00–0.03 (0%)attempts 1–2goals 0–0

  4. Fraser – Richardson – Nolan6:43

    xG 0.08–0.19 (30%)attempts 3–5goals 0–0

Defence pairs

  1. Scuderi – Voynov16:58

    xG 0.73–0.69 (51%)attempts 16–16goals 1–0

  2. Regehr – Ellerby5:50

    xG 0.10–0.07 (61%)attempts 2–2goals 1–0

  3. Regehr – Doughty11:28

    xG 0.26–0.26 (50%)attempts 3–7goals 0–0

How the game flowed

Model-based

Chance quality for each side, minute by minute, with pressure underneath.

Expected goals flow

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.

LAK 1.6 xGMIN 1.6 xG
00.511.5P1P2P3EndxG

Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute

LAKMIN

Win probability

Model-based

How each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.

Win probability

LAK's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line LAK is favoured, below it MIN. Dots are goals.

Excitement 3/100 · #711 of 720 this seasonSwing 0.48 · 3 goals in reachComeback index 57% (winner's lowest chance)
MIN 100%5050%50LAK 100%P1P2P3EndBiggest swing +16 pts

Did the better team win?

Every shot replayed 10,000 times, scoring with its expected-goal probability.

Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 50% of the time.

LAK winsMIN wins

Simulated goal difference (LAK − MIN), 10,000 replays

-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
+1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7

The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).