Fri, Jan 2, 2026·Honda Center, Anaheim
Minnesota Wild 5, Anaheim Ducks 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 72% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 17 | 219 | 28 | 534 |
| ANA | 010 | 110 | 18 | 228 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 5:39MINKirill KaprizovPPAssists: Joel Eriksson Ek, Quinn Hughes · Snap, 0.28 xG1–0
- P2 8:10MINDanila YurovAssists: Yakov Trenin, Quinn Hughes · Deflected, 0.15 xG2–0
- P2 13:46ANABeckett SenneckeAssists: Mason McTavish · Snap, 0.07 xG2–1
- P2 14:45MINYakov TreninGWGAssists: Quinn Hughes, Joel Eriksson Ek · Slap, 0.07 xG3–1
- P3 3:21MINDanila YurovAssists: Quinn Hughes, Mats Zuccarello · Tip-in, 0.06 xG4–1
- P3 15:02MINNico SturmAssists: Marcus Foligno, Jonas Brodin · Snap, 0.03 xG5–1
- P3 17:27ANATroy TerryAssists: Mikael Granlund · Snap, 0.17 xG5–2
Penalties (5)
- P1 5:29ANAAlex Killorn: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P2 0:54ANABeckett Sennecke: High sticking2 min
- P2 4:39ANABeckett Sennecke: Tripping2 min
- P2 10:19MINVinnie Hinostroza: Slashing2 min
- P2 19:57ANAIan Moore: 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 20:00Yurov won the faceoff against Granlund
- 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
- bestFoligno – Trenin – Sturm7:30
xG 0.87–0.05 (95%)attempts 20–4goals 1–0
- Tarasenko – Hinostroza – Hartman8:39
xG 0.10–0.19 (36%)attempts 10–10goals 0–0
- Johansson – Eriksson Ek – Boldy11:52
xG 0.43–0.63 (41%)attempts 14–13goals 0–0
- Zuccarello – Kaprizov – Yurov10:43
xG 0.32–0.62 (34%)attempts 8–11goals 1–2
Defence pairs
- bestSpurgeon – Brodin14:55
xG 0.63–0.35 (64%)attempts 18–18goals 1–0
- Hughes – Faber15:58
xG 0.76–0.77 (50%)attempts 20–18goals 2–1
- Bogosian – Middleton11:50
xG 0.61–0.65 (48%)attempts 14–12goals 0–1
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestJohnston – Harkins – Poehling9:47
xG 0.45–0.21 (68%)attempts 11–6goals 0–0
- Granlund – Terry – Nesterenko8:57
xG 0.25–0.19 (57%)attempts 5–10goals 1–0
- Kreider – McTavish – Sennecke9:09
xG 0.65–0.73 (47%)attempts 12–13goals 1–1
- Killorn – Gauthier – Carlsson3:58
xG 0.03–0.14 (18%)attempts 6–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Moore – Mintyukov15:55
xG 0.95–0.92 (51%)attempts 17–18goals 0–0
- Gudas – Zellweger12:16
xG 0.33–0.30 (52%)attempts 9–16goals 1–0
- Trouba – LaCombe16:05
xG 0.53–0.94 (36%)attempts 23–21goals 1–1
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 72% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − MIN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).