Thu, Feb 12, 2015·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
Florida Panthers 1, Minnesota Wild 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 60% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FLA | 011 | 18 | 08 | 127 |
| MIN | 19 | 19 | 05 | 223 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 4:12MINJason PominvilleAssists: Mikko Koivu, Ryan Suter · Deflected, 0.12 xG0–1
- P2 6:52MINZach ParisePPGWGAssists: Thomas Vanek, Mikko Koivu · Backhand, 0.44 xG0–2
- P2 9:53FLANick BjugstadAssists: Jussi Jokinen, Jimmy Hayes · Wrist, 0.04 xG1–2
Penalties (7)
- P1 11:33MINThomas Vanek: Slashing2 min
- P2 5:51FLADave Bolland: Cross checking2 min · PPG
- P2 12:54FLANick Bjugstad: Hooking2 min
- P2 13:53MINThomas Vanek: Hooking2 min
- P3 3:54MINRyan Suter: High sticking double minor4 min
- P3 5:36FLAAleksander Barkov: Tripping2 min
- P3 18:41MINNino Niederreiter: Tripping2 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 Bjugstad
- 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.
Florida Panthers
Forward lines
- bestThornton – MacKenzie – Upshall7:55
xG 0.27–0.02 (92%)attempts 8–1goals 0–0
- Jokinen – Hayes – Bjugstad11:46
xG 0.56–0.37 (60%)attempts 7–10goals 1–1
- Fleischmann – Bergenheim – Bolland8:10
xG 0.33–0.22 (60%)attempts 8–4goals 0–0
- Boyes – Bergenheim – Bolland2:38
xG 0.12–0.11 (51%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKulikov – Gudbranson14:38
xG 1.00–0.31 (77%)attempts 13–9goals 1–1
- Kampfer – Petrovic12:58
xG 0.37–0.21 (64%)attempts 13–6goals 0–0
- Campbell – Ekblad17:48
xG 0.38–0.73 (34%)attempts 19–11goals 0–0
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestVeilleux – Brodziak – Haula6:52
xG 0.16–0.07 (71%)attempts 3–6goals 0–0
- Coyle – Niederreiter – Fontaine5:20
xG 0.18–0.09 (67%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
- Vanek – Granlund – Fontaine5:30
xG 0.15–0.11 (59%)attempts 3–5goals 0–0
- Vanek – Schroeder – Granlund6:25
xG 0.16–0.20 (45%)attempts 6–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestScandella – Spurgeon14:23
xG 0.48–0.32 (60%)attempts 7–13goals 0–0
- Scandella – Prosser3:34
xG 0.21–0.06 (77%)attempts 3–5goals 0–0
- Suter – Prosser2:38
xG 0.16–0.02 (89%)attempts 3–1goals 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.
MIN's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line MIN is favoured, below it FLA. 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 60% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − FLA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).