Skip to content
Ice Lab

Sat, Feb 4, 2017·Rogers Arena, Vancouver

Minnesota Wild 6, Vancouver Canucks 3

Expected result

Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 65% of the time.

VAN winsMIN wins

By period

Goals and shots on goal in each period.

TeamP1P2P3Total
MIN212314113639
VAN1112709327

Goals, with shots on goal in grey.

Scoring

Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.

  1. P1 13:01MINMike ReillyAssists: Christian Folin, Jason Pominville · Slap, 0.03 xG1–0
  2. P1 17:52VANBrandon SutterAssists: Jannik Hansen · Wrist, 0.14 xG1–1
  3. P1 19:35MINMikael GranlundAssists: Jason Zucker, Mathew Dumba · Wrist, 0.12 xG2–1
  4. P2 4:06MINMikael GranlundSHAssists: Mathew Dumba · Wrist, 0.06 xG3–1
  5. P2 8:36VANBo HorvatAssists: Philip Larsen · Wrist, 0.04 xG3–2
  6. P2 9:30MINZach PariseGWGAssists: Jared Spurgeon, Eric Staal · Deflected, 0.15 xG4–2
  7. P2 18:19MINMikko KoivuAssists: Mikael Granlund, Jared Spurgeon · Wrist, 0.10 xG5–2
  8. P2 19:17VANBrandon SutterPPAssists: Sven Baertschi, Daniel Sedin · Wrist, 0.16 xG5–3
  9. P3 10:19MINMikael GranlundAssists: Jason Zucker, Mikko Koivu · Deflected, 0.15 xG6–3
Penalties (7)
  1. P1 19:45VANNikita Tryamkin: Slashing2 min
  2. P2 3:55MINTyler Graovac: Cross checking2 min
  3. P2 19:05MINMikko Koivu: Hooking2 min · PPG
  4. P3 14:26VANNikita Tryamkin: Roughing2 min
  5. P3 14:26MINNino Niederreiter: Roughing2 min
  6. P3 14:26MINNino Niederreiter: Slashing2 min
  7. P3 14:26VANNikita Tryamkin: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 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.

MIN00 SOG · 0.0 xG

20:00

P1

0.0 xG · 0 SOG0VAN
44% to win56% to win
← MIN attackVAN attack →
  1. P1 20:00Koivu won the faceoff against Sedin
  • Goal
  • Shot
  • Miss
  • Block
  • Hit
  • Takeaway
  • Giveaway
  • Faceoff
  • Penalty

The numbers

Team totals, side by side.

MINVAN
39Shots on goal27
2.8Expected goals1.9
59Shot attempts49
36Faceoffs won41
1Power plays2
8Penalty minutes6
13Hits26
12Blocked shots11
2Giveaways7
3Takeaways6

Line combinations that worked

Model-based

Each 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

  1. bestStaal – Parise – Tuch12:37

    xG 0.87–0.15 (85%)attempts 19–4goals 1–1

  2. Pominville – Haula – Niederreiter10:50

    xG 0.47–0.39 (54%)attempts 13–8goals 1–1

  3. Koivu – Zucker – Granlund12:58

    xG 0.67–0.65 (51%)attempts 12–13goals 3–0

  4. Stewart – Coyle – Graovac9:52

    xG 0.11–0.31 (27%)attempts 4–15goals 0–0

Defence pairs

  1. bestSuter – Spurgeon23:32

    xG 1.61–0.51 (76%)attempts 27–13goals 3–1

  2. Dumba – Folin2:20

    xG 0.09–0.10 (48%)attempts 1–5goals 0–0

  3. Scandella – Dumba17:07

    xG 0.40–0.45 (47%)attempts 15–12goals 1–0

Vancouver Canucks

Forward lines

  1. bestSkille – Chaput – Gaunce8:46

    xG 0.21–0.13 (62%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0

  2. Eriksson – Sutter – Granlund3:10

    xG 0.06–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–0goals 0–0

  3. Sedin – Sedin – Eriksson11:18

    xG 0.43–0.47 (48%)attempts 9–11goals 0–1

  4. Hansen – Sutter – Granlund10:33

    xG 0.20–0.45 (30%)attempts 4–9goals 1–2

Defence pairs

  1. bestSbisa – Tanev16:40

    xG 0.52–0.26 (67%)attempts 11–8goals 1–1

  2. Edler – Larsen3:18

    xG 0.26–0.12 (69%)attempts 5–1goals 1–0

  3. Edler – Stecher14:00

    xG 0.66–0.55 (55%)attempts 16–12goals 0–0

How the game flowed

Model-based

Chance quality for each side, minute by minute, with pressure underneath.

Expected goals flow

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.

VAN 1.9 xGMIN 2.8 xG
-0.500.511.522.53P1P2P3EndxG

Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute

VANMIN

Win probability

Model-based

How each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.

Win probability

VAN's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line VAN is favoured, below it MIN. Dots are goals.

Excitement 76/100 · #275 of 1230 this seasonSwing 1.45 · 9 goals in reachComeback index 44% (winner's lowest chance)
MIN 100%5050%50VAN 100%P1P2P3EndBiggest swing +18 pts

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.

VAN winsMIN wins

Simulated goal difference (VAN − MIN), 10,000 replays

-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
+1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7

The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).