Sat, Jan 21, 2017·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
Anaheim Ducks 3, Minnesota Wild 5
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 58% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 29 | 111 | 09 | 329 |
| MIN | 18 | 18 | 39 | 525 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 2:35MINErik HaulaAssists: Jason Pominville, Zach Parise · Slap, 0.03 xG0–1
- P1 5:47ANAStefan NoesenAssists: Jared Boll, Cam Fowler · Wrist, 0.24 xG1–1
- P1 13:58ANACam FowlerSHUnassisted · Wrist, 0.17 xG2–1
- P2 2:23ANACorey PerryPPAssists: Ryan Getzlaf, Ryan Kesler · Wrist, 0.28 xG3–1
- P2 5:03MINJason ZuckerUnassisted · Wrist, 0.10 xG3–2
- P3 13:39MINErik HaulaAssists: Ryan Suter, Mathew Dumba · Deflected, 0.07 xG3–3
- P3 14:15MINRyan SuterGWGAssists: Nino Niederreiter, Charlie Coyle · Deflected, 0.02 xG3–4
- P3 15:38MINJason ZuckerAssists: Mikael Granlund, Ryan Suter · Backhand, 0.10 xG3–5
Penalties (6)
- P1 5:35ANANick Ritchie: Fighting5 min
- P1 5:35MINKurtis Gabriel: Fighting5 min
- P1 12:14ANAHampus Lindholm: Tripping2 min
- P1 14:09ANAKevin Bieksa: Tripping2 min
- P2 0:54MINMarco Scandella: Holding2 min · PPG
- P2 9:54MINCharlie Coyle: High sticking2 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 Getzlaf
- 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.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestBoll – Cramarossa – Noesen3:58
xG 0.26–0.02 (94%)attempts 2–1goals 1–0
- Vermette – Ritchie – Kase12:17
xG 0.30–0.16 (65%)attempts 11–6goals 0–0
- Kesler – Cogliano – Shaw12:12
xG 0.43–0.42 (51%)attempts 12–13goals 0–2
- Getzlaf – Perry – Rakell13:42
xG 0.24–0.53 (31%)attempts 10–15goals 0–3
Defence pairs
- bestManson – Lindholm14:21
xG 0.52–0.26 (67%)attempts 10–8goals 0–0
- Bieksa – Fowler4:20
xG 0.11–0.04 (76%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Bieksa – Lindholm3:34
xG 0.12–0.04 (74%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestKoivu – Zucker – Granlund14:30
xG 0.57–0.10 (86%)attempts 15–5goals 2–0
- Stewart – Schroeder – Gabriel3:30
xG 0.05–0.04 (58%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Parise – Stewart – Haula4:14
xG 0.03–0.10 (20%)attempts 2–5goals 0–0
- Staal – Coyle – Niederreiter13:47
xG 0.22–0.42 (35%)attempts 9–14goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestSuter – Spurgeon22:29
xG 0.72–0.20 (79%)attempts 20–14goals 3–0
- Reilly – Folin8:59
xG 0.18–0.30 (37%)attempts 6–5goals 1–1
- Scandella – Dumba16:45
xG 0.24–0.73 (25%)attempts 9–18goals 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 ANA. 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 58% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).