Sat, Oct 3, 2026·Grand Casino Arena, St. Paul
Boston Bruins 1, Minnesota Wild 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Minnesota Wild win this game 75% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOS | 18 | 06 | 013 | 127 |
| MIN | 06 | 215 | 29 | 430 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 1:53BOSTanner JeannotAssists: Mark Kastelic, Connor Clifton · Wrist, 0.11 xG1–0
- P2 6:11MINKirill KaprizovPPAssists: Maxim Shabanov, Joel Eriksson Ek · Snap, 0.26 xG1–1
- P2 12:28MINQuinn HughesPPGWGAssists: Bobby Brink, Ryan Hartman · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–2
- P3 3:24MINJared SpurgeonAssists: Michael McCarron, Quinn Hughes · Wrist, 0.02 xG1–3
- P3 18:59MINKirill KaprizovENUnassisted · Backhand, 0.62 xG1–4
Penalties (6)
- P2 3:15MINRyan Hartman: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P2 5:14BOSCasey Mittelstadt: Interference2 min · PPG
- P2 10:21BOSNikita Zadorov: Slashing2 min
- P2 10:29BOSConnor Clifton: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P3 8:49MINDaemon Hunt: Delaying game2 min
- P3 11:26MINJared Spurgeon: Tripping2 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 Minten
- 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.
Boston Bruins
Forward lines
- bestPastrnak – Peterka – Minten2:36
xG 0.51–0.09 (84%)attempts 6–1goals 0–0
- Kuraly – Jeannot – Kastelic6:38
xG 0.15–0.07 (66%)attempts 7–6goals 1–1
- Khusnutdinov – Minten – Hagens8:16
xG 0.33–0.26 (56%)attempts 6–6goals 0–0
- Zacha – Geekie – Mittelstadt11:38
xG 0.26–0.37 (41%)attempts 8–9goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestClifton – Zadorov14:05
xG 0.55–0.22 (72%)attempts 12–10goals 1–1
- Aspirot – Lohrei14:39
xG 0.70–0.42 (63%)attempts 12–13goals 0–0
- Lindholm – Borgen14:59
xG 0.56–0.65 (46%)attempts 10–14goals 0–0
Minnesota Wild
Forward lines
- bestFoligno – Foligno – McCarron9:55
xG 0.41–0.22 (65%)attempts 11–3goals 1–0
- Kaprizov – Yurov – Shabanov8:08
xG 0.13–0.26 (33%)attempts 2–6goals 0–0
- Hartman – Trenin – Brink8:22
xG 0.28–0.50 (36%)attempts 9–12goals 0–1
- Coleman – Eriksson Ek – Boldy9:12
xG 0.31–0.61 (34%)attempts 7–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBrodin – Maatta15:30
xG 0.42–0.08 (84%)attempts 11–4goals 0–0
- Spurgeon – Hughes15:50
xG 0.56–0.90 (38%)attempts 14–16goals 1–0
- Bogosian – Hunt10:10
xG 0.08–0.42 (16%)attempts 6–11goals 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 BOS. 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 75% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MIN − BOS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).