Sat, Feb 20, 2021·Honda Center, Anaheim
Minnesota Wild 5, Anaheim Ducks 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 71% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 211 | 19 | 29 | 529 |
| ANA | 06 | 19 | 012 | 127 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 15:07MINMats ZuccarelloAssists: Kirill Kaprizov, Jared Spurgeon · Snap, 0.13 xG1–0
- P1 16:17MINKevin FialaGWGUnassisted · Wrist, 0.14 xG2–0
- P2 3:00MINKevin FialaPPAssists: Jordan Greenway, Mathew Dumba · Wrist, 0.26 xG3–0
- P2 16:29ANADavid BackesAssists: Josh Mahura, Kevin Shattenkirk · Tip-in, 0.11 xG3–1
- P3 5:45MINVictor RaskAssists: Kirill Kaprizov, Mats Zuccarello · Slap, 0.07 xG4–1
- P3 14:26MINJoel Eriksson EkAssists: Ryan Hartman, Kevin Fiala · Wrist, 0.08 xG5–1
Penalties (7)
- P1 11:27MINJoel Eriksson Ek: Hooking2 min
- P1 19:50MINJordan Greenway: Slashing2 min
- P1 19:50ANAMaxime Comtois: Roughing2 min
- P1 19:50ANAMaxime Comtois: Roughing2 min
- P2 2:32ANATroy Terry: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P2 11:51MINIan Cole: Holding2 min
- P3 12:06MINRyan Hartman: Interference2 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 Lundeström
- 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
- bestFiala – Greenway – Eriksson Ek11:49
xG 1.06–0.23 (82%)attempts 13–7goals 1–0
- Bonino – Bjugstad – Sturm9:29
xG 0.57–0.24 (70%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
- Parise – Foligno – Hartman9:45
xG 0.22–0.43 (34%)attempts 6–12goals 0–0
- Zuccarello – Rask – Kaprizov13:08
xG 0.31–0.57 (36%)attempts 7–14goals 2–1
Defence pairs
- bestCole – Spurgeon14:12
xG 1.24–0.46 (73%)attempts 16–14goals 1–0
- Brodin – Dumba16:15
xG 0.48–0.23 (67%)attempts 11–9goals 1–0
- Suter – Addison14:37
xG 0.70–0.66 (52%)attempts 11–19goals 2–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestGetzlaf – Terry – Jones7:46
xG 0.53–0.02 (96%)attempts 9–2goals 0–0
- Silfverberg – Heinen – Steel10:20
xG 0.27–0.01 (95%)attempts 12–5goals 0–0
- Rowney – Jones – Lundeström2:00
xG 0.03–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Backes – Deslauriers – Rowney8:05
xG 0.18–0.59 (24%)attempts 3–7goals 1–2
Defence pairs
- Fowler – Hakanpää14:01
xG 0.59–0.62 (49%)attempts 18–11goals 0–1
- Shattenkirk – Mahura14:47
xG 0.57–0.82 (41%)attempts 13–12goals 1–1
- Hutton – Larsson16:12
xG 0.46–0.89 (34%)attempts 17–14goals 0–2
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 71% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).