Sat, Nov 9, 2019·Gila River Arena, Glendale
Minnesota Wild 4, Arizona Coyotes 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 63% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 05 | 314 | 15 | 424 |
| ARI | 29 | 112 | 014 | 335 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 8:50ARIMichael GrabnerAssists: Aaron Ness · Wrist, 0.04 xG0–1
- P1 12:40ARIJakob ChychrunAssists: Nick Schmaltz, Christian Dvorak · Wrist, 0.06 xG0–2
- P2 3:19MINMikko KoivuPPAssists: Jared Spurgeon, Ryan Suter · Snap, 0.19 xG1–2
- P2 8:20ARIVinnie HinostrozaAssists: Jordan Oesterle, Oliver Ekman-Larsson · Wrist, 0.03 xG1–3
- P2 13:04MINKevin FialaAssists: Brad Hunt, Zach Parise · Wrist, 0.28 xG2–3
- P2 19:10MINMathew DumbaAssists: Kevin Fiala, Jason Zucker · Slap, 0.04 xG3–3
- P3 4:54MINRyan HartmanGWGAssists: Jared Spurgeon, Ryan Suter · Snap, 0.05 xG4–3
Penalties (4)
- P1 18:20MINMikko Koivu: Hooking2 min
- P2 2:14ARIJordan Oesterle: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P3 10:00MINRyan Hartman: Cross checking2 min
- P3 19:48MINEric Staal: Holding2 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 20:00Dvorak won the faceoff against Eriksson Ek
- 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. Shift data for this game is incomplete, so treat these as rough.
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestStaal – Zuccarello – Zucker4:34
xG 0.43–0.09 (83%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Koivu – Parise – Fiala3:31
xG 0.09–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Hartman – Greenway – Eriksson Ek3:50
xG 0.03–0.15 (18%)attempts 1–4goals 0–2
Defence pairs
- bestBrodin – Dumba6:38
xG 0.48–0.10 (83%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Suter – Spurgeon4:49
xG 0.14–0.05 (72%)attempts 6–1goals 0–0
- Hunt – Soucy2:38
xG 0.02–0.02 (51%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestKessel – Schmaltz – Dvorak4:27
xG 0.12–0.03 (78%)attempts 4–1goals 1–0
- Richardson – Grabner – Hinostroza3:25
xG 0.17–0.14 (56%)attempts 3–3goals 1–0
- Soderberg – Fischer – Crouse4:44
xG 0.00–0.11 (0%)attempts 0–7goals 0–0
- Stepan – Garland – Keller3:37
xG 0.09–0.36 (20%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestNess – Lyubushkin4:43
xG 0.19–0.07 (74%)attempts 4–2goals 1–0
- Ekman-Larsson – Oesterle7:48
xG 0.01–0.19 (4%)attempts 1–8goals 0–0
- Goligoski – Chychrun4:57
xG 0.18–0.39 (32%)attempts 4–5goals 1–0
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.
ARI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ARI 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 63% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ARI − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).