WPG @ MIN
2026-01-15 · final 6–2 · what happened, next to what the engine said before puck drop
What happened
WPG attacks the left net, MIN the right — every unblocked attempt the game produced: × goals, • on net, ◦ missed (hover a marker for the shooter and its xG). To compare against the pregame call, switch the Surface to the engine's predicted-xG map — the shots land on top of where the engine expected the game to be played.
| WPG | MIN | |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | Goals | 2 |
| 2.65 | Expected goals (xG) | 2.27 |
| 1.40 | 5v5 xG | 1.18 |
| 1.25 | Power-play xG | 1.10 |
| 29 | Shots on goal | 34 |
| 49 | Shot attempts | 59 |
Counts come from the shot table behind the maps: empty-net attempts and the shootout are excluded, so the goals row can trail the official final by an empty-netter or the shootout's deciding goal.
Goals
| Team | Scorer | Period | Strength | xG |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WPG | Jonathan Toews | 1 | PP | 0.51 |
| WPG | Tanner Pearson | 1 | 5v5 | 0.05 |
| WPG | Josh Morrissey | 1 | 5v5 | 0.02 |
| WPG | Logan Stanley | 2 | 5v5 | 0.03 |
| WPG | Gabriel Vilardi | 2 | PP | 0.24 |
| WPG | Mark Scheifele | 2 | 5v5 | 0.02 |
| MIN | Danila Yurov | 2 | 5v5 | 0.13 |
| MIN | Marcus Johansson | 3 | 5v5 | 0.19 |
The prediction, scored
Before puck drop the engine made MIN a 62.7% favorite, expecting a 2.35–3.10 game — WPG won 6–2, so the call missed. Every number in this section was issued before the game and is never re-graded.
| pred. xG | actual xG | pred. 5v5 | actual 5v5 | pred. ST | actual PP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WPG | 2.35 | 2.65 | 1.67 | 1.40 | 0.55 | 1.25 |
| MIN | 3.10 | 2.27 | 2.23 | 1.18 | 0.72 | 1.10 |
Predicted 5v5 / special-teams portions come from the map's strength splits (one shared scale per team pins the all-strengths total to its expected goals), so they don't sum exactly — the remainder is 4v4, 3v3, and other mixed states. The actual PP column is power-play xG only, the same bucket the map's special-teams view draws.
The pregame score grid
The likeliest finals the engine saw before the game, with what actually happened marked — ■ WPG · ■ MIN.
| Likeliest finals (WPG–MIN) | probability | |
|---|---|---|
| 2–3 | 5.9% | |
| 2–2 | 5.7% | tied after regulation — OT/SO decides |
| 1–3 | 5.0% | |
| 1–2 | 4.9% | |
| 3–3 | 4.6% | tied after regulation — OT/SO decides |
| 6–2 | 0.5% | what happened |
Scoreline odds treat the two teams' totals as independent — the engine's known simplification (it slightly under-counts regulation ties; the correlation term is registered v1.1 work). The OT/SO layer is a separate fitted model and is already inside the headline win probability.
The pregame read
The engine made MIN a 62.7% favorite — MIN controls 56.9% of the predicted xG. Of WPG's 2.35 expected goals, 1.67 should come at 5v5 and 0.55 on the power play; MIN projects 2.23 at 5v5 and 0.72 on the power play. The logistic challenger put the home side at 64.3%, Elo at 63.7%.
Tale of the tape
How each team fares on its own, season to date: per-game xG rates with league rank (of 32). Rank 1 is best on every row — orange ranks sit in the top third of the league, gray in the bottom third.
| WPG | MIN | |
|---|---|---|
| 2.64 (25th) | Offense xG for / game |
2.92 (15th) |
| 2.82 (12th) | Defense xG against / game |
2.83 (13th) |
| 0.61 (26th) | Power play PP xG / game |
0.71 (15th) |
| 0.64 (7th) | Penalty kill PP xG conceded / game |
0.68 (17th) |
Season-to-date form as of the site's latest build, shown for context — the ratings the engine actually used were its own as-of-game-day state. Replay this matchup in the lab →