Thu, Nov 14, 2019·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
Arizona Coyotes 2, Minnesota Wild 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 77% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARI | 08 | 18 | 113 | 229 |
| MIN | 120 | 09 | 25 | 334 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 14:39MINKevin FialaAssists: Zach Parise · Backhand, 0.15 xG0–1
- P2 5:04ARIConor GarlandAssists: Nick Schmaltz · Tip-in, 0.11 xG1–1
- P3 5:39MINZach ParisePPAssists: Mikko Koivu, Jason Zucker · Backhand, 0.11 xG1–2
- P3 7:32ARILawson CrouseAssists: Phil Kessel, Oliver Ekman-Larsson · Backhand, 0.04 xG2–2
- P3 12:11MINJordan GreenwayGWGAssists: Jonas Brodin, Joel Eriksson Ek · Tip-in, 0.07 xG2–3
Penalties (6)
- P1 7:43ARIAlex Goligoski: Hooking2 min
- P1 11:26MINKevin Fiala: Holding2 min
- P2 2:32ARIAlex Goligoski: Holding2 min
- P3 3:01MINRyan Hartman: Interference2 min
- P3 5:29ARIOliver Ekman-Larsson: Interference2 min · PPG
- P3 14:48MINJason Zucker: 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 20:00Koivu won the faceoff against Stepan
- 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.
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestSchmaltz – Dvorak – Garland12:36
xG 0.46–0.09 (83%)attempts 13–4goals 1–1
- Stepan – Hinostroza – Keller10:10
xG 0.07–0.36 (17%)attempts 6–8goals 0–0
- Richardson – Grabner – Fischer8:36
xG 0.14–0.51 (21%)attempts 5–8goals 0–0
- Soderberg – Kessel – Crouse11:16
xG 0.15–1.08 (12%)attempts 5–17goals 1–1
Defence pairs
- bestNess – Oesterle14:17
xG 0.33–0.11 (75%)attempts 8–6goals 1–1
- Goligoski – Ekman-Larsson2:23
xG 0.02–0.09 (21%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- Demers – Ekman-Larsson12:24
xG 0.38–0.48 (44%)attempts 12–12goals 1–1
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestRask – Hartman – Donato7:46
xG 0.79–0.15 (85%)attempts 14–6goals 0–0
- Koivu – Parise – Fiala10:44
xG 0.68–0.05 (94%)attempts 11–5goals 1–0
- Staal – Zuccarello – Zucker12:03
xG 0.43–0.26 (62%)attempts 5–9goals 0–1
- Greenway – Eriksson Ek – Kunin10:56
xG 0.14–0.45 (23%)attempts 5–11goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestSuter – Spurgeon19:03
xG 0.71–0.27 (73%)attempts 13–12goals 0–0
- Brodin – Dumba17:24
xG 0.94–0.56 (62%)attempts 19–15goals 2–1
- Hunt – Soucy8:01
xG 0.38–0.20 (66%)attempts 4–6goals 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.
MIN's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line MIN is favoured, below it ARI. 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 77% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − ARI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).