Thu, Jan 16, 2020·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
Tampa Bay Lightning 2, Minnesota Wild 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 55% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 05 | 17 | 18 | 220 |
| MIN | 18 | 211 | 04 | 323 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 14:17MINZach ParisePPAssists: Eric Staal, Jared Spurgeon · Wrist, 0.08 xG0–1
- P2 7:42TBLNikita KucherovAssists: Mikhail Sergachev, Ondrej Palat · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–1
- P2 12:32MINJoel Eriksson EkAssists: Luke Kunin, Marcus Foligno · Snap, 0.16 xG1–2
- P2 14:43MINRyan SuterGWGAssists: Jordan Greenway · Slap, 0.02 xG1–3
- P3 9:32TBLNikita KucherovPPAssists: Steven Stamkos, Anthony Cirelli · Wrist, 0.03 xG2–3
Penalties (6)
- P1 8:47TBLJan Rutta: Holding2 min
- P1 12:20TBLBrayden Point: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P2 15:46TBLAlexander Volkov: Hooking2 min
- P3 1:24MINMikko Koivu: Holding2 min
- P3 7:43MINMathew Dumba: Roughing2 min · PPG
- P3 11:43TBLSteven Stamkos: Hooking2 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 20:00Eriksson Ek won the faceoff against Point
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestKillorn – Kucherov – Point3:03
xG 0.20–0.04 (85%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Palat – Kucherov – Point10:15
xG 0.40–0.28 (59%)attempts 11–7goals 1–1
- Gourde – Verhaeghe – Stephens5:10
xG 0.12–0.04 (76%)attempts 4–2goals 0–1
- Killorn – Paquette – Volkov5:57
xG 0.18–0.18 (51%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestShattenkirk – Sergachev12:06
xG 0.83–0.20 (80%)attempts 15–7goals 1–0
- Shattenkirk – Hedman3:51
xG 0.23–0.10 (70%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Hedman – Rutta13:16
xG 0.46–0.36 (56%)attempts 10–6goals 0–1
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestKoivu – Hartman – Greenway10:53
xG 0.39–0.05 (89%)attempts 13–7goals 1–0
- Foligno – Eriksson Ek – Kunin8:47
xG 0.36–0.27 (57%)attempts 5–6goals 1–0
- Staal – Parise – Zuccarello10:25
xG 0.15–0.21 (41%)attempts 3–7goals 0–0
- Zucker – Rask – Fiala9:39
xG 0.36–0.74 (33%)attempts 8–9goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSuter – Spurgeon15:50
xG 0.52–0.34 (61%)attempts 12–6goals 2–0
- Pateryn – Soucy13:46
xG 0.48–0.63 (43%)attempts 8–16goals 0–0
- Brodin – Dumba14:50
xG 0.44–0.61 (42%)attempts 12–15goals 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 TBL. 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 55% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).