Fri, Feb 23, 2018·Madison Square Garden, New York
Minnesota Wild 4, New York Rangers 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 73% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 28 | 014 | 215 | 437 |
| NYR | 06 | 16 | 011 | 123 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 16:06MINMikael GranlundAssists: Eric Staal · Wrist, 0.17 xG1–0
- P1 18:43MINEric StaalGWGAssists: Zach Parise, Mikael Granlund · Tip-in, 0.15 xG2–0
- P2 2:41NYRJesper FastAssists: J.T. Miller · Snap, 0.15 xG2–1
- P3 0:52MINEric StaalPPAssists: Ryan Suter, Mikael Granlund · Wrist, 0.15 xG3–1
- P3 9:22MINMikael GranlundAssists: Jason Zucker, Eric Staal · Wrist, 0.09 xG4–1
Penalties (2)
- P2 19:21NYRRob O'Gara: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P3 5:06MINJared Spurgeon: Delaying game puck over glass2 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 20:00Staal won the faceoff against Zibanejad
- 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
- bestEnnis – Niederreiter – Eriksson Ek11:32
xG 1.03–0.37 (74%)attempts 16–6goals 0–0
- Staal – Zucker – Granlund12:11
xG 1.17–0.63 (65%)attempts 16–10goals 2–0
- Koivu – Parise – Coyle14:05
xG 0.25–0.09 (74%)attempts 8–9goals 0–0
- Cullen – Winnik – Foligno10:53
xG 0.32–0.36 (47%)attempts 7–5goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestSuter – Dumba21:38
xG 1.71–0.84 (67%)attempts 24–12goals 2–1
- Spurgeon – Seeler13:47
xG 0.89–0.06 (94%)attempts 18–7goals 1–0
- Prosser – Reilly14:07
xG 0.36–0.50 (42%)attempts 8–11goals 0–0
New York Rangers
Forward lines
- Kreider – Zibanejad – Buchnevich12:25
xG 0.76–0.77 (50%)attempts 11–12goals 0–1
- McLeod – Carey – Lettieri10:30
xG 0.17–0.28 (37%)attempts 5–9goals 0–0
- Desharnais – Fast – Miller12:15
xG 0.23–0.54 (30%)attempts 9–8goals 1–1
- Zuccarello – Hayes – Vesey10:07
xG 0.09–0.94 (8%)attempts 4–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Staal – O'Gara17:15
xG 0.65–0.91 (42%)attempts 12–11goals 0–0
- Gilmour – DeAngelo17:48
xG 0.89–1.14 (44%)attempts 14–20goals 1–1
- Skjei – Pionk16:56
xG 0.15–0.78 (16%)attempts 9–17goals 0–1
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.
NYR's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NYR 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, Minnesota Wild win this game 73% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NYR − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).