Sun, Jan 15, 2017·United Center, Chicago
Minnesota Wild 3, Chicago Blackhawks 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 51% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 08 | 215 | 19 | 332 |
| CHI | 114 | 116 | 05 | 235 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 4:33CHIPatrick KaneAssists: Artem Anisimov, Artemi Panarin · Wrist, 0.05 xG0–1
- P2 4:16CHIPatrick KaneAssists: Artem Anisimov · Wrist, 0.04 xG0–2
- P2 6:23MINNino NiederreiterPPAssists: Mikael Granlund, Jonas Brodin · Wrist, 0.14 xG1–2
- P2 11:00MINChris StewartAssists: Jordan Schroeder, Ryan Suter · Wrist, 0.05 xG2–2
- P3 5:08MINJason PominvilleGWGAssists: Marco Scandella · Wrist, 0.21 xG3–2
Penalties (5)
- P1 12:28MINNino Niederreiter: Cross checking2 min
- P1 12:28CHIRyan Hartman: Interference2 min
- P2 5:04CHIArtem Anisimov: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P2 18:11MINMikko Koivu: Hooking2 min
- P3 19:37MINRyan Suter: 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 Toews
- 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
- bestKoivu – Zucker – Granlund12:36
xG 1.84–0.54 (77%)attempts 22–12goals 0–0
- Haula – Coyle – Niederreiter2:11
xG 0.02–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
- Pominville – Haula – Niederreiter7:02
xG 0.24–0.32 (43%)attempts 4–5goals 1–1
- Stewart – Schroeder – Graovac8:31
xG 0.12–0.26 (32%)attempts 3–8goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestSuter – Spurgeon20:04
xG 1.19–0.62 (66%)attempts 21–16goals 1–0
- Brodin – Folin12:32
xG 0.88–0.64 (58%)attempts 10–15goals 0–0
- Scandella – Dumba13:03
xG 0.38–0.86 (31%)attempts 10–15goals 1–2
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestPanik – Hartman – Kero9:48
xG 0.31–0.00 (100%)attempts 8–2goals 0–0
- Anisimov – Kane – Panarin15:52
xG 0.72–0.41 (64%)attempts 20–10goals 2–1
- Kane – Rasmussen – Schmaltz2:29
xG 0.13–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Hossa – Toews – Hinostroza10:18
xG 0.51–1.59 (24%)attempts 9–19goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSeabrook – Kempny14:38
xG 0.48–0.21 (70%)attempts 17–11goals 0–0
- Rozsival – van Riemsdyk7:21
xG 0.37–0.27 (58%)attempts 9–3goals 1–2
- Keith – Seabrook2:22
xG 0.12–0.05 (71%)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.
CHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CHI 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, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 51% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).