Sat, Dec 2, 2017·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
St. Louis Blues 1, Minnesota Wild 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, St. Louis Blues win this game 61% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| STL | 011 | 114 | 016 | 01 | 142 |
| MIN | 17 | 09 | 08 | 11 | 225 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 4:26MINRyan SuterAssists: Jason Zucker, Mathew Dumba · Deflected, 0.04 xG0–1
- P2 17:41STLPatrik BerglundPPAssists: Vladimir Tarasenko, Vladimir Sobotka · Wrist, 0.04 xG1–1
- OT 0:39MINMathew DumbaGWGAssists: Charlie Coyle · Wrist, 0.32 xG1–2
Penalties (8)
- P1 9:27STLBrayden Schenn: High sticking2 min
- P1 17:32MINChris Stewart: Roughing2 min
- P1 19:49STLScottie Upshall: Slashing2 min
- P2 3:42MINDaniel Winnik: Holding the stick2 min
- P2 15:53MINMathew Dumba: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P3 9:36MINMarcus Foligno: Delaying game bench face off violation2 min
- P3 13:40MINMikko Koivu: Slashing2 min
- P3 16:02STLRobert Bortuzzo: 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 20:00Schenn won the faceoff against Staal
- 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.
St. Louis Blues
Forward lines
- bestSteen – Schenn – Schwartz10:41
xG 0.83–0.09 (90%)attempts 19–5goals 0–0
- Upshall – Brodziak – Jaskin7:15
xG 0.13–0.06 (69%)attempts 7–1goals 0–0
- Berglund – Paajarvi – Blais6:16
xG 0.21–0.49 (30%)attempts 6–9goals 0–1
- Stastny – Sobotka – Tarasenko10:38
xG 0.25–0.59 (30%)attempts 15–10goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestEdmundson – Parayko15:34
xG 0.74–0.20 (79%)attempts 26–9goals 0–1
- Gunnarsson – Bortuzzo8:55
xG 0.30–0.27 (52%)attempts 11–10goals 0–0
- Bouwmeester – Pietrangelo14:55
xG 0.59–0.92 (39%)attempts 17–11goals 0–0
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestKoivu – Zucker – Granlund8:20
xG 0.57–0.12 (83%)attempts 8–8goals 0–0
- Cullen – Ennis – Mitchell5:50
xG 0.01–0.09 (8%)attempts 1–3goals 0–0
- Winnik – Stewart – Coyle7:12
xG 0.12–0.22 (36%)attempts 4–7goals 0–0
- Staal – Foligno – Niederreiter8:08
xG 0.03–0.68 (5%)attempts 1–14goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestProsser – Reilly10:46
xG 0.45–0.26 (63%)attempts 9–11goals 0–0
- Suter – Dumba18:07
xG 0.70–0.76 (48%)attempts 13–27goals 1–0
- Brodin – Murphy12:56
xG 0.18–0.64 (22%)attempts 6–13goals 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 STL. 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, St. Louis Blues win this game 61% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − STL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).