Mon, Jan 18, 2021·Honda Center, Anaheim
Minnesota Wild 0, Anaheim Ducks 1
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 78% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 011 | 014 | 09 | 034 |
| ANA | 011 | 010 | 16 | 127 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P3 4:09ANANicolas DeslauriersGWGAssists: Kevin Shattenkirk, Carter Rowney · Snap, 0.16 xG0–1
Penalties (9)
- P1 4:25ANASam Steel: Hooking2 min
- P1 14:25MINJordan Greenway: Roughing2 min
- P1 16:14ANAJakob Silfverberg: High sticking2 min
- P1 19:20ANAJosh Manson: Roughing2 min
- P1 19:20MINJordan Greenway: Roughing2 min
- P2 3:59ANAJani Hakanpää: Interference2 min
- P2 17:47ANARyan Getzlaf: Tripping2 min
- P3 0:22ANADerek Grant: Holding2 min
- P3 16:16MINNick Bjugstad: Charging2 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 20:00Grant 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.
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestBjugstad – Hartman – Sturm8:22
xG 0.65–0.06 (91%)attempts 14–2goals 0–0
- Foligno – Greenway – Eriksson Ek10:58
xG 0.20–0.22 (48%)attempts 5–8goals 0–0
- Bonino – Johansson – Fiala8:40
xG 0.20–0.26 (43%)attempts 4–6goals 0–0
- Parise – Rask – Kaprizov8:25
xG 0.39–0.48 (45%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestPateryn – Soucy10:54
xG 0.70–0.18 (79%)attempts 13–7goals 0–0
- Spurgeon – Brodin14:09
xG 0.87–0.65 (57%)attempts 15–11goals 0–1
- Suter – Dumba16:29
xG 0.84–0.78 (52%)attempts 16–14goals 0–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestGetzlaf – Milano – Heinen2:46
xG 0.25–0.15 (62%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Getzlaf – Rakell – Milano8:16
xG 0.32–0.32 (50%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0
- Henrique – Silfverberg – Heinen4:38
xG 0.21–0.23 (49%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
- Grant – Deslauriers – Rowney7:37
xG 0.27–0.51 (34%)attempts 4–7goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- Fowler – Hakanpää5:04
xG 0.12–0.08 (61%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Shattenkirk – Fowler4:48
xG 0.33–0.28 (54%)attempts 5–4goals 0–0
- Lindholm – Larsson4:06
xG 0.33–0.29 (53%)attempts 5–4goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA 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 78% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).