Tue, Apr 5, 2016·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
San Jose Sharks 3, Minnesota Wild 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 57% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SJS | 15 | 19 | 16 | 320 |
| MIN | 05 | 012 | 012 | 029 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 4:43SJSLogan CoutureGWGAssists: Brenden Dillon, Joonas Donskoi · Backhand, 0.07 xG1–0
- P2 5:31SJSPatrick MarleauPPAssists: Logan Couture, Joe Thornton · Backhand, 0.15 xG2–0
- P3 18:15SJSPatrick MarleauAssists: Melker Karlsson, Brenden Dillon · Wrist, 0.03 xG3–0
Penalties (8)
- P1 12:32MINZach Parise: Hooking2 min
- P1 16:22SJSJoe Pavelski: Boarding2 min
- P2 3:01SJSLogan Couture: Interference2 min
- P2 5:03MINJonas Brodin: Interference2 min · PPG
- P2 9:38SJSJustin Braun: Holding2 min
- P2 15:02MINNate Prosser: Fighting5 min
- P2 15:02SJSTommy Wingels: Fighting5 min
- P3 10:52MINMikko Koivu: 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 20:00Thornton 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.
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestZubrus – Spaling – Haley8:38
xG 0.49–0.05 (91%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
- Thornton – Pavelski – Hertl11:36
xG 0.26–0.12 (69%)attempts 11–8goals 0–0
- Ward – Couture – Donskoi11:08
xG 0.20–0.21 (49%)attempts 12–7goals 1–0
- Marleau – Wingels – Karlsson10:12
xG 0.00–0.39 (0%)attempts 1–14goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestPolak – Dillon15:45
xG 0.55–0.20 (73%)attempts 17–13goals 2–0
- Braun – DeMelo13:04
xG 0.16–0.23 (41%)attempts 3–11goals 0–0
- Martin – Burns13:38
xG 0.22–0.38 (36%)attempts 7–11goals 0–0
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestJones – Haula – Niederreiter2:47
xG 0.19–0.01 (94%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Pominville – Parise – Granlund3:23
xG 0.19–0.03 (87%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
- Dalpe – Zucker – Coyle5:52
xG 0.11–0.02 (87%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Pominville – Haula – Niederreiter6:42
xG 0.09–0.09 (49%)attempts 6–6goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestSuter – Spurgeon21:50
xG 0.54–0.24 (70%)attempts 16–14goals 0–1
- Scandella – Brodin13:42
xG 0.25–0.25 (50%)attempts 13–11goals 0–1
- Prosser – Folin8:33
xG 0.08–0.50 (14%)attempts 6–9goals 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 SJS. 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, San Jose Sharks win this game 57% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − SJS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).