Sat, Jan 17, 2015·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
Arizona Coyotes 1, Minnesota Wild 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 72% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARI | 08 | 17 | 011 | 126 |
| MIN | 115 | 113 | 15 | 333 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 13:35MINCharlie CoyleAssists: Nino Niederreiter, Christian Folin · Wrist, 0.17 xG0–1
- P2 8:41MINJason ZuckerGWGAssists: Justin Fontaine, Devan Dubnyk · Backhand, 0.11 xG0–2
- P2 13:47ARIAntoine VermettePPAssists: David Moss, Keith Yandle · Backhand, 0.23 xG1–2
- P3 19:06MINZach PariseENAssists: Mikko Koivu · Wrist, 0.60 xG1–3
Penalties (9)
- P1 5:43ARILucas Lessio: Holding2 min
- P1 8:19MINJustin Fontaine: Holding2 min
- P1 11:25ARITobias Rieder: Interference2 min
- P1 14:31ARIMartin Erat: Hooking2 min
- P2 6:50MINCharlie Coyle: Roughing2 min
- P2 6:50ARIMichael Stone: Roughing2 min
- P2 6:50MINNate Prosser: Roughing2 min
- P2 6:50ARIKyle Chipchura: Roughing2 min
- P2 13:09MINMikko Koivu: Slashing2 min · PPG
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 Vermette
- 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.
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestVitale – McMillan – Lessio8:37
xG 0.70–0.07 (91%)attempts 11–4goals 0–0
- Erat – Hanzal – Boedker3:35
xG 0.25–0.10 (72%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Vermette – Boedker – Rieder12:39
xG 0.07–0.13 (36%)attempts 10–7goals 0–0
- Erat – Hanzal – Gagner7:46
xG 0.31–0.37 (45%)attempts 11–3goals 0–2
Defence pairs
- bestYandle – Murphy14:37
xG 0.63–0.26 (71%)attempts 16–11goals 0–0
- Michalek – Samuelsson13:32
xG 0.67–0.40 (63%)attempts 11–13goals 0–0
- Yandle – Stone2:18
xG 0.00–0.17 (0%)attempts 1–1goals 0–1
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestKoivu – Pominville – Parise15:24
xG 0.54–0.26 (68%)attempts 15–13goals 0–0
- Vanek – Haula – Zucker9:35
xG 0.20–0.20 (50%)attempts 4–9goals 0–0
- Cooke – Brodziak – Fontaine11:31
xG 0.07–0.27 (20%)attempts 3–9goals 0–0
- Carter – Coyle – Niederreiter7:19
xG 0.38–0.67 (36%)attempts 5–10goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestScandella – Spurgeon18:20
xG 0.57–0.22 (72%)attempts 15–11goals 1–0
- Spurgeon – Dumba2:34
xG 0.37–0.04 (91%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Brodin – Dumba2:30
xG 0.02–0.02 (58%)attempts 2–2goals 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.
MIN's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line MIN is favoured, below it ARI. 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, Minnesota Wild win this game 72% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − ARI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).