Sun, Jan 8, 2017·Honda Center, Anaheim
Minnesota Wild 2, Anaheim Ducks 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 65% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 08 | 216 | 012 | 236 |
| ANA | 17 | 06 | 011 | 124 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 11:44ANARyan KeslerAssists: Jakob Silfverberg · Tip-in, 0.27 xG0–1
- P2 4:39MINMathew DumbaPPAssists: Zach Parise, Eric Staal · Slap, 0.17 xG1–1
- P2 6:21MINJared SpurgeonGWGAssists: Jason Pominville, Jason Zucker · Wrist, 0.02 xG2–1
Penalties (9)
- P1 7:26ANAJosh Manson: Holding2 min
- P2 3:23ANALogan Shaw: Roughing2 min · PPG
- P2 3:58ANACam Fowler: Hooking2 min
- P2 5:47MINNino Niederreiter: Roughing2 min
- P2 5:47ANAJohn Gibson: Roughing2 min
- P2 11:09MINDevan Dubnyk: Tripping2 min
- P2 13:25MINZach Parise: Interference2 min
- P3 5:54MINMikko Koivu: Hooking2 min
- P3 8:28ANAAndrew Cogliano: 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 20:00Vermette 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.
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestStaal – Parise – Coyle10:28
xG 0.63–0.29 (69%)attempts 13–5goals 0–0
- Stewart – Schroeder – Graovac8:06
xG 0.40–0.07 (86%)attempts 8–4goals 0–0
- Pominville – Haula – Niederreiter11:10
xG 0.72–0.42 (63%)attempts 18–9goals 0–0
- Koivu – Zucker – Granlund8:11
xG 0.06–0.60 (9%)attempts 5–9goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestScandella – Brodin5:44
xG 0.37–0.06 (87%)attempts 8–2goals 0–0
- Brodin – Folin8:39
xG 0.39–0.32 (55%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0
- Suter – Dumba3:31
xG 0.06–0.07 (46%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestPerry – Cramarossa – Rakell7:36
xG 0.71–0.24 (75%)attempts 10–10goals 0–0
- Kesler – Cogliano – Silfverberg10:07
xG 0.72–0.58 (56%)attempts 10–11goals 1–0
- Vermette – Ritchie – Kase9:03
xG 0.16–0.05 (78%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0
- Perry – Wagner – Rakell2:15
xG 0.00–0.06 (0%)attempts 0–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestVatanen – Manson4:33
xG 0.46–0.09 (84%)attempts 6–2goals 1–0
- Fowler – Montour6:24
xG 0.47–0.16 (74%)attempts 7–7goals 0–0
- Vatanen – Montour3:33
xG 0.29–0.15 (65%)attempts 4–5goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it MIN. 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 65% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).