Tue, Jan 2, 2024·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
Calgary Flames 3, Minnesota Wild 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Calgary Flames win this game 52% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGY | 213 | 010 | 110 | 333 |
| MIN | 07 | 15 | 017 | 129 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 11:40CGYAndrew MangiapaneAssists: Rasmus Andersson, MacKenzie Weegar · Tip-in, 0.09 xG1–0
- P1 19:36CGYJonathan HuberdeauGWGAssists: Elias Lindholm, Yegor Sharangovich · Backhand, 0.14 xG2–0
- P2 9:28MINPatrick MaroonAssists: Nic Petan, Marco Rossi · Wrist, 0.15 xG2–1
- P3 19:03CGYBlake ColemanENAssists: Mikael Backlund, MacKenzie Weegar · Wrist, 0.66 xG3–1
Penalties (6)
- P1 7:32CGYConnor Zary: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P1 11:00MINMatt Boldy: Slashing2 min
- P1 11:00CGYNazem Kadri: Cross checking2 min
- P2 18:23MINFrederick Gaudreau: Interference2 min
- P3 2:31CGYNazem Kadri: Holding2 min
- P3 6:28CGYBlake Coleman: 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 20:00Kadri 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.
Calgary Flames
Forward lines
- bestGreer – Dube – Ruzicka5:02
xG 0.50–0.00 (100%)attempts 11–1goals 0–0
- Kadri – Pospisil – Zary8:04
xG 0.25–0.27 (49%)attempts 10–11goals 0–0
- Backlund – Coleman – Mangiapane11:19
xG 0.29–0.45 (39%)attempts 9–13goals 0–1
- Huberdeau – Lindholm – Sharangovich10:39
xG 0.57–0.76 (43%)attempts 17–11goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- Tanev – Hanifin18:13
xG 0.56–0.52 (52%)attempts 14–22goals 0–0
- Andersson – Gilbert9:55
xG 0.30–0.33 (48%)attempts 10–5goals 0–0
- Weegar – Oesterle12:07
xG 0.86–0.97 (47%)attempts 23–12goals 1–1
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestJohansson – Eriksson Ek – Boldy13:36
xG 1.11–0.37 (75%)attempts 24–13goals 0–0
- Hartman – Petan – Rossi9:24
xG 0.40–0.13 (76%)attempts 12–3goals 0–0
- Maroon – Gaudreau – Lucchini9:27
xG 0.10–0.42 (20%)attempts 6–15goals 0–0
- Duhaime – Walker – Dewar6:04
xG 0.09–0.66 (13%)attempts 1–13goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestMiddleton – Faber16:27
xG 1.02–0.49 (67%)attempts 22–13goals 0–0
- Bogosian – Mermis4:31
xG 0.23–0.18 (56%)attempts 5–7goals 1–0
- Spurgeon – Mermis7:03
xG 0.26–0.24 (52%)attempts 5–5goals 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.
MIN's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line MIN is favoured, below it CGY. 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, Calgary Flames win this game 52% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − CGY), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).