Mon, Apr 2, 2018·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
Edmonton Oilers 0, Minnesota Wild 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 90% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDM | 08 | 011 | 03 | 022 |
| MIN | 113 | 16 | 121 | 340 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:33MINZach PariseGWGUnassisted · Wrist, 0.09 xG0–1
- P2 8:24MINZach PariseAssists: Jonas Brodin, Mikko Koivu · Wrist, 0.26 xG0–2
- P3 19:16MINJoel Eriksson EkENAssists: Charlie Coyle, Daniel Winnik · Wrist, 0.64 xG0–3
Penalties (4)
- P1 12:31EDMAnton Slepyshev: Tripping2 min
- P2 15:18MINEric Staal: Holding2 min
- P3 1:57MINRyan Murphy: Slashing2 min
- P3 14:34EDMEthan Bear: Slashing2 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 McDavid
- 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.
Edmonton Oilers
Forward lines
- bestCammalleri – Kassian – Slepyshev9:32
xG 0.23–0.16 (59%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- Aberg – Khaira – Caggiula7:40
xG 0.11–0.33 (26%)attempts 4–10goals 0–0
- Lucic – Strome – Puljujarvi13:04
xG 0.41–0.76 (35%)attempts 13–12goals 0–0
- Rattie – Draisaitl – McDavid14:22
xG 0.59–1.50 (28%)attempts 10–19goals 0–2
Defence pairs
- bestSekera – Russell12:04
xG 0.54–0.49 (52%)attempts 12–6goals 0–1
- Nurse – Bear5:45
xG 0.11–0.11 (50%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
- Larsson – Auvitu3:38
xG 0.03–0.04 (39%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestKoivu – Parise – Granlund12:27
xG 1.45–0.41 (78%)attempts 19–7goals 2–0
- Staal – Zucker – Niederreiter13:19
xG 1.04–0.54 (66%)attempts 15–16goals 0–0
- Winnik – Foligno – Eriksson Ek8:18
xG 0.20–0.19 (51%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Cullen – Ennis – Coyle9:45
xG 0.25–0.33 (43%)attempts 9–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBrodin – Dumba17:27
xG 1.48–0.41 (78%)attempts 21–8goals 2–0
- Seeler – Murphy15:07
xG 0.91–0.46 (67%)attempts 14–11goals 0–0
- Prosser – Soucy14:40
xG 0.54–0.45 (55%)attempts 16–13goals 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 EDM. 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 90% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − EDM), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).