Wed, Dec 21, 2022·Honda Center, Anaheim
Minnesota Wild 4, Anaheim Ducks 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 90% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 09 | 114 | 319 | 442 |
| ANA | 04 | 112 | 06 | 122 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 5:48ANAMason McTavishUnassisted · Wrist, 0.19 xG0–1
- P2 16:03MINConnor DewarAssists: Ryan Reaves, Mason Shaw · Wrist, 0.00 xG1–1
- P3 4:46MINMatt BoldyGWGUnassisted · Wrist, 0.20 xG2–1
- P3 8:54MINJoel Eriksson EkPPAssists: Calen Addison, Matt Boldy · Tip-in, 0.11 xG3–1
- P3 18:12MINRyan HartmanENAssists: Matt Boldy, Frederick Gaudreau · Wrist, 0.70 xG4–1
Penalties (11)
- P1 16:09ANAAdam Henrique: Holding2 min
- P2 5:04ANAAdam Henrique: Tripping2 min
- P2 5:04MINMarcus Foligno: Embellishment2 min
- P2 11:29MINJared Spurgeon: Holding2 min
- P2 12:30ANATrevor Zegras: Hooking2 min
- P2 16:38ANASimon Benoit: Cross checking2 min
- P2 19:03ANARyan Strome: Tripping2 min
- P3 7:41ANADmitry Kulikov: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P3 13:01ANAFrank Vatrano: Slashing2 min
- P3 19:37ANAFrank Vatrano: Misconduct10 min
- P3 19:37MINFrederick Gaudreau: 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 McTavish
- 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
- bestReaves – Shaw – Dewar9:45
xG 0.23–0.03 (89%)attempts 10–5goals 1–0
- Hartman – Gaudreau – Boldy6:04
xG 0.36–0.21 (63%)attempts 10–5goals 0–0
- Foligno – Greenway – Eriksson Ek8:02
xG 0.33–0.19 (64%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- Zuccarello – Kaprizov – Steel8:57
xG 0.24–0.40 (37%)attempts 10–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMerrill – Addison10:36
xG 0.90–0.20 (82%)attempts 15–6goals 1–0
- Spurgeon – Middleton13:18
xG 0.34–0.42 (45%)attempts 13–11goals 1–0
- Brodin – Dumba16:03
xG 0.42–0.63 (40%)attempts 16–16goals 0–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestHenrique – Terry – Zegras7:34
xG 0.31–0.10 (76%)attempts 7–3goals 0–0
- Silfverberg – Strome – Comtois4:25
xG 0.43–0.25 (63%)attempts 11–6goals 0–0
- Silfverberg – Vatrano – McTavish3:35
xG 0.10–0.09 (53%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
- Carrick – Megna – Kirkland4:41
xG 0.01–0.00 (69%)attempts 3–4goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestKlingberg – Benoit10:41
xG 0.46–0.20 (70%)attempts 13–7goals 0–0
- Fowler – Klingberg2:57
xG 0.31–0.10 (75%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Shattenkirk – Beaulieu14:22
xG 0.36–0.60 (38%)attempts 10–19goals 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.
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 90% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).