Skip to content
Ice Lab

Tue, Dec 15, 2015·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul

Vancouver Canucks 2, Minnesota Wild 6

Expected result

Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 85% of the time.

MIN winsVAN wins

By period

Goals and shots on goal in each period.

TeamP1P2P3Total
VAN01219110231
MIN21741905641

Goals, with shots on goal in grey.

Scoring

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

  1. P1 5:17MINThomas VanekPPAssists: Zach Parise, Jason Pominville · Tip-in, 0.16 xG0–1
  2. P1 12:47MINJason ZuckerAssists: Thomas Vanek, Mikko Koivu · Wrist, 0.22 xG0–2
  3. P2 5:25MINZach ParisePPGWGAssists: Mikko Koivu, Thomas Vanek · Wrist, 0.07 xG0–3
  4. P2 6:45VANJannik HansenAssists: Henrik Sedin · Wrist, 0.01 xG1–3
  5. P2 8:12MINMikko KoivuAssists: Thomas Vanek, Nate Prosser · Snap, 0.08 xG1–4
  6. P2 12:36MINRyan SuterPPAssists: Zach Parise, Mikko Koivu · Wrist, 0.04 xG1–5
  7. P2 16:03MINMarco ScandellaAssists: Mathew Dumba, Nino Niederreiter · Wrist, 0.03 xG1–6
  8. P3 6:16VANDaniel SedinAssists: Henrik Sedin · Snap, 0.12 xG2–6
Penalties (8)
  1. P1 4:50VANBen Hutton: Holding2 min · PPG
  2. P2 5:12VANYannick Weber: Hooking2 min · PPG
  3. P2 10:59VANDerek Dorsett: Roughing2 min · PPG
  4. P2 10:59MINNate Prosser: Roughing2 min
  5. P2 11:04VANJared McCann: High sticking double minor4 min
  6. P3 18:27VANDerek Dorsett: Fighting5 min
  7. P3 18:27VANDerek Dorsett: Boarding2 min
  8. P3 18:27MINNate Prosser: Fighting5 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.

VAN00 SOG · 0.0 xG

20:00

P1

0.0 xG · 0 SOG0MIN
47% to win54% to win
← VAN attackMIN attack →
  1. P1 20:00Granlund won the faceoff against Sedin
  • Goal
  • Shot
  • Miss
  • Block
  • Hit
  • Takeaway
  • Giveaway
  • Faceoff
  • Penalty

The numbers

Team totals, side by side.

VANMIN
31Shots on goal41
1.3Expected goals3.6
46Shot attempts65
25Faceoffs won37
0Power plays5
17Penalty minutes7
15Hits13
10Blocked shots9
0Giveaways4
8Takeaways10

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.

Vancouver Canucks

Forward lines

  1. bestSedin – Sedin – Hansen7:48

    xG 0.32–0.03 (93%)attempts 10–3goals 1–0

  2. Higgins – Hansen – McCann4:38

    xG 0.03–0.02 (60%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0

  3. Burrows – Baertschi – Horvat7:15

    xG 0.17–0.20 (46%)attempts 6–3goals 0–1

  4. Vrbata – Baertschi – Horvat4:43

    xG 0.07–0.32 (18%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0

Defence pairs

  1. bestEdler – Tanev13:51

    xG 0.47–0.34 (58%)attempts 16–9goals 1–1

  2. Weber – Hutton18:40

    xG 0.16–0.62 (21%)attempts 9–11goals 0–0

  3. Biega – Bartkowski15:19

    xG 0.39–0.96 (29%)attempts 15–17goals 0–2

Minnesota Wild

Forward lines

  1. bestKoivu – Vanek – Zucker12:54

    xG 0.69–0.08 (90%)attempts 14–7goals 2–0

  2. Coyle – Niederreiter – Fontaine12:01

    xG 0.61–0.21 (75%)attempts 9–11goals 1–0

  3. Pominville – Parise – Granlund13:33

    xG 0.81–0.54 (60%)attempts 12–14goals 0–1

  4. Porter – Carter – Haula11:47

    xG 0.14–0.27 (33%)attempts 9–11goals 0–1

Defence pairs

  1. bestSuter – Spurgeon16:23

    xG 1.62–0.36 (82%)attempts 21–12goals 2–1

  2. Scandella – Dumba12:13

    xG 0.36–0.29 (56%)attempts 13–11goals 1–1

  3. Brodin – Dumba2:33

    xG 0.04–0.02 (65%)attempts 3–1goals 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.

MIN 3.6 xGVAN 1.3 xG
01234P1P2P3EndxG

Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute

MINVAN

Win probability

Model-based

How each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.

Win probability

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

Excitement 41/100 · #710 of 1230 this seasonSwing 0.61 · 6 goals in reachComeback index 53% (winner's lowest chance)
VAN 100%5050%50MIN 100%P1P2P3EndBiggest swing +14 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 85% of the time.

MIN winsVAN wins

Simulated goal difference (MIN − VAN), 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).