Sun, Jan 22, 2017·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
Nashville Predators 4, Minnesota Wild 2
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Nashville Predators win this game 65% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NSH | 010 | 110 | 312 | 432 |
| MIN | 210 | 04 | 09 | 223 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 2:18MINMikael GranlundAssists: Jason Zucker, Jordan Schroeder · Wrist, 0.13 xG0–1
- P1 7:31MINJason PominvilleAssists: Erik Haula, Ryan Suter · Wrist, 0.02 xG0–2
- P2 2:25NSHJames NealAssists: Mike Ribeiro, Yannick Weber · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–2
- P3 2:20NSHFilip ForsbergAssists: Viktor Arvidsson, Ryan Johansen · Backhand, 0.07 xG2–2
- P3 13:24NSHFilip ForsbergGWGAssists: Ryan Ellis, Ryan Johansen · Slap, 0.03 xG3–2
- P3 18:42NSHRyan JohansenENAssists: Ryan Ellis · Wrist, 0.51 xG4–2
Penalties (5)
- P1 9:24MINMarco Scandella: Cross checking2 min
- P2 5:19NSHJames Neal: Interference2 min
- P2 7:26MINNino Niederreiter: Holding2 min
- P2 7:26NSHP.K. Subban: Embellishment2 min
- P2 13:59MINDarcy Kuemper: 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
- Press play, or drag along the timeline.
- 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.
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestRibeiro – Neal – Jarnkrok10:40
xG 0.55–0.27 (67%)attempts 17–5goals 1–0
- McLeod – Grant – Zolnierczyk6:58
xG 0.09–0.16 (37%)attempts 2–7goals 0–0
- Johansen – Forsberg – Arvidsson10:07
xG 0.84–0.91 (48%)attempts 15–8goals 2–1
- Fisher – Smith – Watson12:35
xG 0.06–0.58 (9%)attempts 6–13goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestSubban – Ekholm17:31
xG 1.01–0.67 (60%)attempts 26–11goals 1–0
- Ellis – Irwin16:52
xG 0.37–0.30 (55%)attempts 15–11goals 1–0
- Weber – Bitetto10:55
xG 0.36–1.16 (24%)attempts 8–15goals 1–2
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestSchroeder – Zucker – Granlund11:06
xG 0.96–0.15 (86%)attempts 9–9goals 1–0
- Pominville – Parise – Haula9:00
xG 0.22–0.29 (43%)attempts 7–10goals 1–1
- Stewart – Graovac – Gabriel5:01
xG 0.11–0.24 (31%)attempts 4–9goals 0–0
- Staal – Coyle – Niederreiter15:26
xG 0.47–0.79 (37%)attempts 12–15goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSuter – Spurgeon19:37
xG 1.30–0.63 (67%)attempts 16–21goals 1–2
- Prosser – Reilly9:58
xG 0.59–0.04 (94%)attempts 17–2goals 1–0
- Scandella – Prosser2:10
xG 0.05–0.06 (42%)attempts 1–4goals 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 NSH. 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, Nashville Predators win this game 65% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − NSH), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).