Sat, Jan 11, 2025·SAP Center at San Jose, San Jose
Minnesota Wild 3, San Jose Sharks 1
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 67% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 16 | 19 | 17 | 322 |
| SJS | 016 | 113 | 08 | 137 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 5:51MINMarco RossiAssists: Mats Zuccarello, Matt Boldy · Backhand, 0.11 xG1–0
- P2 4:34MINMatt BoldyGWGAssists: Mats Zuccarello · Wrist, 0.05 xG2–0
- P2 17:30SJSWilliam EklundAssists: Macklin Celebrini, Jake Walman · Backhand, 0.13 xG2–1
- P3 18:43MINMats ZuccarelloAssists: Declan Chisholm · Wrist, 0.00 xG3–1
Penalties (2)
- P1 6:03MINJake Middleton: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P3 19:10MINMarcus Foligno: Slashing2 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 20:00Gaudreau won the faceoff against Kunin
- 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
- bestZuccarello – Boldy – Rossi16:09
xG 1.34–0.47 (74%)attempts 25–17goals 3–0
- Johansson – Foligno – Eriksson Ek3:46
xG 0.00–0.03 (0%)attempts 0–1goals 0–0
- Johansson – Zuccarello – Eriksson Ek2:02
xG 0.00–0.06 (0%)attempts 1–5goals 0–0
- Johansson – Hartman – Eriksson Ek8:45
xG 0.25–0.35 (42%)attempts 7–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestDermott – Chisholm13:00
xG 0.71–0.48 (60%)attempts 15–12goals 1–1
- Bogosian – Middleton21:51
xG 1.18–0.96 (55%)attempts 22–29goals 1–0
- Merrill – Chisholm3:55
xG 0.00–0.07 (0%)attempts 5–2goals 1–0
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestToffoli – Eklund – Celebrini13:58
xG 0.90–0.39 (70%)attempts 24–9goals 1–1
- Granlund – Zetterlund – Graf13:50
xG 0.68–0.63 (52%)attempts 16–16goals 0–0
- Grundstrom – Dellandrea – Sturm7:24
xG 0.13–0.21 (39%)attempts 11–5goals 0–0
- Goodrow – Kunin – Smith7:16
xG 0.11–0.59 (16%)attempts 5–11goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestFerraro – Liljegren16:45
xG 0.60–0.40 (60%)attempts 22–11goals 0–0
- Ceci – Walman16:23
xG 0.59–0.49 (55%)attempts 18–16goals 0–0
- Ceci – Ferraro2:03
xG 0.02–0.06 (25%)attempts 2–2goals 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.
SJS's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line SJS 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, San Jose Sharks win this game 67% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (SJS − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).