Skip to content
Ice Lab

Sat, Dec 3, 2022·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul

Anaheim Ducks 4, Minnesota Wild 5 (SO)

Expected result

Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 62% of the time.

MIN winsANA wins

By period

Goals and shots on goal in each period.

TeamP1P2P3OTSOTotal
ANA11221019021433
MIN211016220022549

Goals, with shots on goal in grey.

Scoring

Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.

  1. P1 4:37MINCalen AddisonAssists: Marcus Foligno, Joel Eriksson Ek · Snap, 0.02 xG0–1
  2. P1 8:13ANARyan StromeAssists: Frank Vatrano · Tip-in, 0.12 xG1–1
  3. P1 15:04MINConnor DewarAssists: Ryan Reaves, Mason Shaw · Poke, 0.15 xG1–2
  4. P2 10:43ANACam FowlerPPAssists: Mason McTavish, Trevor Zegras · Wrist, 0.03 xG2–2
  5. P2 19:00ANATrevor ZegrasAssists: Troy Terry, Dmitry Kulikov · Wrist, 0.26 xG3–2
  6. P3 5:26MINJoel Eriksson EkPPAssists: Calen Addison, Matt Boldy · Backhand, 0.17 xG3–3
  7. P3 10:36ANATroy TerryPPAssists: Adam Henrique, Mason McTavish · Wrist, 0.29 xG4–3
  8. P3 17:25MINKirill KaprizovAssists: Mats Zuccarello, Jared Spurgeon · Snap, 0.12 xG4–4

Shootout

  1. 1. ANA Trevor Zegras scored
  2. 2. MIN Kirill Kaprizov scored
  3. 3. MIN Frederick Gaudreau stopped
  4. 4. ANA Mason McTavish stopped
  5. 5. MIN Matt Boldy scored
  6. 6. ANA Ryan Strome stopped
Penalties (8)
  1. P2 10:09MINJon Merrill: Hooking2 min · PPG
  2. P2 15:07ANASimon Benoit: Hooking2 min
  3. P3 4:34ANABrett Leason: Holding2 min · PPG
  4. P3 7:26MINJordan Greenway: Roughing2 min
  5. P3 7:26ANAJohn Gibson: Roughing2 min
  6. P3 10:18MINMats Zuccarello: Too many men on the ice2 min · PPG
  7. OT 3:52MINKirill Kaprizov: Hooking2 min
  8. OT 4:50ANAJohn Gibson: Puck thrown forward goalkeeper2 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.

ANA00 SOG · 0.0 xG

20:00

P1

0.0 xG · 0 SOG0MIN
49% to win51% to win
← ANA attackMIN attack →
  1. P1 20:00Strome won the faceoff against Eriksson Ek
  • Goal
  • Shot
  • Miss
  • Block
  • Hit
  • Takeaway
  • Giveaway
  • Faceoff
  • Penalty

The numbers

Team totals, side by side.

ANAMIN
33Shots on goal49
3.4Expected goals4.2
52Shot attempts81
38Faceoffs won43
3Power plays2
8Penalty minutes8
19Hits21
18Blocked shots9
1Giveaways7
7Takeaways7

Line combinations that worked

Model-based

Each team's forward lines and defence pairs at 5-on-5 (two minutes or more together), best first by expected goals for minus against.

Anaheim Ducks

Forward lines

  1. bestJones – Leason – McTavish11:21

    xG 0.45–0.24 (65%)attempts 13–7goals 0–0

  2. Strome – Vatrano – Regenda7:53

    xG 0.23–0.35 (40%)attempts 4–11goals 1–0

  3. Henrique – Terry – Zegras12:23

    xG 0.42–0.59 (42%)attempts 14–10goals 0–1

  4. Grant – Silfverberg – Carrick4:50

    xG 0.07–0.30 (19%)attempts 2–7goals 0–0

Defence pairs

  1. bestShattenkirk – Beaulieu10:48

    xG 0.69–0.44 (61%)attempts 11–12goals 1–1

  2. Shattenkirk – Fowler2:23

    xG 0.00–0.11 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0

  3. Vaakanainen – Benoit17:01

    xG 0.24–0.88 (22%)attempts 13–20goals 0–1

Minnesota Wild

Forward lines

  1. bestZuccarello – Kaprizov – Steel16:52

    xG 1.79–0.31 (85%)attempts 24–10goals 1–0

  2. Foligno – Greenway – Eriksson Ek12:48

    xG 0.49–0.26 (65%)attempts 18–9goals 1–0

  3. Reaves – Shaw – Dewar6:48

    xG 0.37–0.28 (57%)attempts 8–7goals 1–1

  4. Petan – Gaudreau – Boldy9:02

    xG 0.30–0.43 (41%)attempts 8–6goals 0–0

Defence pairs

  1. bestGoligoski – Dumba19:55

    xG 1.97–0.33 (86%)attempts 33–12goals 1–0

  2. Goligoski – Spurgeon2:42

    xG 0.23–0.04 (85%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0

  3. Dumba – Middleton2:06

    xG 0.14–0.02 (86%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0

How the game flowed

Model-based

Chance quality for each side, minute by minute, with pressure underneath.

Expected goals flow

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.

MIN 4.2 xGANA 3.4 xG
01234P1P2P3OTEndxG

Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute

MINANA

Win probability

Model-based

How each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.

Win probability

MIN's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line MIN is favoured, below it ANA. Dots are goals.

Excitement 96/100 · #84 of 1312 this seasonSwing 2.84 · 8 goals in reachComeback index 10% (winner's lowest chance)
ANA 100%5050%50MIN 100%P1P2P3OTEndBiggest swing +44 pts

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 62% of the time.

MIN winsANA wins

Simulated goal difference (MIN − ANA), 10,000 replays

-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
+1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7

The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).