Sat, Mar 22, 2025·Xcel Energy Center, St. Paul
Buffalo Sabres 1, Minnesota Wild 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 62% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | 08 | 06 | 17 | 121 |
| MIN | 06 | 310 | 15 | 421 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 0:56MINMarco RossiAssists: Yakov Trenin, Vinnie Hinostroza · Wrist, 0.17 xG0–1
- P2 5:07MINJustin BrazeauGWGAssists: Brendan Gaunce, Matt Boldy · Deflected, 0.19 xG0–2
- P2 8:11MINMats ZuccarelloAssists: Matt Boldy, Zach Bogosian · Wrist, 0.10 xG0–3
- P3 6:48BUFJJ PeterkaAssists: Owen Power, Rasmus Dahlin · Wrist, 0.09 xG1–3
- P3 19:27MINFrederick GaudreauENAssists: Mats Zuccarello, Jonas Brodin · Wrist, 0.59 xG1–4
Penalties (6)
- P1 4:08MINJonas Brodin: High sticking2 min
- P1 8:29BUFTage Thompson: Hooking2 min
- P2 16:23BUFRasmus Dahlin: Interference2 min
- P3 2:18MINDevin Shore: Hooking2 min
- P3 5:19MINMarcus Johansson: Slashing2 min
- P3 5:19BUFJacob Bernard-Docker: 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 20:00Hartman won the faceoff against Kozak
- 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.
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- bestLafferty – Malenstyn – Kozak4:59
xG 0.13–0.05 (71%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
- Malenstyn – Krebs – Benson3:07
xG 0.03–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–0goals 0–0
- Zucker – Tuch – Greenway8:02
xG 0.12–0.20 (37%)attempts 5–7goals 0–0
- Thompson – McLeod – Peterka13:55
xG 0.49–1.11 (31%)attempts 16–13goals 0–2
Defence pairs
- bestByram – Power7:18
xG 0.59–0.35 (63%)attempts 11–5goals 0–1
- Dahlin – Bernard-Docker3:28
xG 0.03–0.01 (79%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Samuelsson – Byram2:27
xG 0.11–0.10 (51%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestZuccarello – Boldy – Rossi11:19
xG 0.90–0.40 (69%)attempts 15–13goals 1–0
- Nyquist – Johansson – Gaudreau8:04
xG 0.17–0.09 (66%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- Johansson – Zuccarello – Rossi2:10
xG 0.05–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Hinostroza – Hartman – Trenin10:56
xG 0.30–0.27 (53%)attempts 7–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSpurgeon – Brodin15:36
xG 0.91–0.35 (72%)attempts 16–10goals 1–0
- Middleton – Faber14:31
xG 0.41–0.16 (72%)attempts 8–12goals 1–0
- Bogosian – Merrill10:30
xG 0.18–0.35 (34%)attempts 10–10goals 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 BUF. 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 62% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − BUF), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).