Tue, Dec 3, 2024·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
Vancouver Canucks 2, Minnesota Wild 3 (OT)
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Vancouver Canucks win this game 72% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VAN | 17 | 17 | 016 | 02 | 232 |
| MIN | 013 | 14 | 19 | 13 | 329 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 8:37VANQuinn HughesPPAssists: Elias Pettersson, Conor Garland · Wrist, 0.01 xG1–0
- P2 7:56MINFrederick GaudreauAssists: Marcus Foligno, Brock Faber · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–1
- P2 19:18VANJake DeBruskAssists: Elias Pettersson, Carson Soucy · Wrist, 0.23 xG2–1
- P3 1:43MINJake MiddletonUnassisted · Wrist, 0.06 xG2–2
- OT 4:36MINKirill KaprizovGWGAssists: Marco Rossi · Wrist, 0.07 xG2–3
Penalties (4)
- P1 7:40MINJon Merrill: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P2 0:46MINKirill Kaprizov: Hooking2 min
- P2 13:25VANCarson Soucy: Tripping2 min
- P3 4:03MINMarat Khusnutdinov: Holding2 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 20:00Suter won the faceoff against Gaudreau
- 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.
Vancouver Canucks
Forward lines
- bestBoeser – DeBrusk – Pettersson10:43
xG 0.68–0.58 (54%)attempts 12–15goals 1–2
- Joshua – Garland – Suter11:56
xG 0.06–0.05 (58%)attempts 3–11goals 0–0
- Heinen – Räty – Sasson7:23
xG 0.06–0.27 (18%)attempts 1–6goals 0–0
- Blueger – Sherwood – Hoglander9:25
xG 0.10–0.35 (23%)attempts 5–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSoucy – Juulsen13:47
xG 0.91–0.46 (67%)attempts 13–15goals 1–0
- Soucy – Desharnais2:03
xG 0.00–0.01 (0%)attempts 0–2goals 0–0
- Myers – Soucy2:16
xG 0.09–0.11 (45%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestEriksson Ek – Kaprizov – Boldy13:33
xG 0.62–0.13 (83%)attempts 20–3goals 1–0
- Foligno – Gaudreau – Trenin7:31
xG 0.32–0.07 (83%)attempts 10–4goals 1–0
- Johansson – Hartman – Rossi11:48
xG 0.25–0.11 (69%)attempts 14–6goals 0–0
- Shore – Jones – Khusnutdinov6:21
xG 0.12–0.11 (51%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMiddleton – Faber18:48
xG 0.49–0.35 (59%)attempts 19–15goals 2–0
- Spurgeon – Chisholm16:42
xG 0.46–0.47 (49%)attempts 17–8goals 0–0
- Bogosian – Merrill11:12
xG 0.39–0.46 (46%)attempts 13–6goals 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.
MIN's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line MIN is favoured, below it VAN. 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, Vancouver Canucks win this game 72% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − VAN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).