Mon, Mar 11, 2019·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
San Jose Sharks 3, Minnesota Wild 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 55% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SJS | 011 | 18 | 210 | 329 |
| MIN | 011 | 06 | 07 | 024 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 14:06SJSBarclay GoodrowGWGAssists: Marc-Edouard Vlasic, Tim Heed · Deflected, 0.11 xG1–0
- P3 4:37SJSTomas HertlAssists: Timo Meier, Gustav Nyquist · Wrist, 0.19 xG2–0
- P3 10:01SJSLogan CoutureUnassisted · Wrist, 0.33 xG3–0
Penalties (6)
- P1 11:05MINEric Fehr: Tripping2 min
- P1 16:39MINVictor Rask: Hooking2 min
- P2 1:30SJSGustav Nyquist: Holding2 min
- P2 17:37SJSBrenden Dillon: Holding2 min
- P3 10:01MINAnthony Bitetto: Penalty shot hooking on breakaway0 min
- P3 12:07SJSMicheal Haley: 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
- P1 20:00Couture 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.
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestNyquist – Hertl – Meier2:30
xG 0.45–0.01 (98%)attempts 7–1goals 1–0
- Pavelski – Couture – Meier10:59
xG 0.55–0.33 (62%)attempts 10–13goals 0–0
- Nyquist – Donskoi – Hertl6:41
xG 0.45–0.31 (59%)attempts 6–6goals 0–0
- Haley – Goodrow – Karlsson10:47
xG 0.22–0.22 (50%)attempts 5–8goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestBurns – Simek15:34
xG 0.64–0.37 (63%)attempts 16–10goals 0–0
- Vlasic – Heed13:00
xG 0.61–0.40 (60%)attempts 10–16goals 2–0
- Braun – Dillon16:39
xG 0.38–0.60 (39%)attempts 11–16goals 0–0
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestParise – Rask – Fiala6:09
xG 0.33–0.15 (70%)attempts 7–6goals 0–0
- Staal – Parise – Fiala5:06
xG 0.16–0.08 (66%)attempts 8–1goals 0–0
- Staal – Zucker – Greenway4:49
xG 0.31–0.34 (47%)attempts 7–4goals 0–1
- Aberg – Donato – Eriksson Ek4:32
xG 0.15–0.20 (42%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBitetto – Hunt12:02
xG 0.61–0.31 (66%)attempts 10–9goals 0–1
- Pateryn – Brodin14:40
xG 0.39–0.30 (56%)attempts 16–11goals 0–0
- Pateryn – Bitetto2:10
xG 0.01–0.19 (5%)attempts 1–2goals 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 SJS. 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, San Jose Sharks win this game 55% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − SJS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).