xJawn NHL expected goals

← Games

Save a card: Summary · Full card · Game flow · MIN skaters · VAN skaters · MIN lines · VAN lines · Matchups

MIN 4 – 2 VAN

Minnesota Wild at Vancouver Canucks

Final · Oct 25, 2026
2026-27 · regular season
The call
MIN 59.2% ✓
expected 3.44–2.90 · MIN won 4–2
actual xG
5.12–1.66
xG share, predicted → actual
MIN 54% → 76%46% → 24% VAN
Today's puzzle Remember Some Guys — name the skater from the shape of his career. Three clues, one guess a day. Play →
Adjusts with rink filters

Strength and score are read from MIN's side, the same minutes at both ends: PP = MIN power play · PK = VAN power play · Leading = MIN ahead · ST = each club's own power play.

MIN attacks◀ all strengths
VAN attacksall strengths ▶
× goal• on net ◦ missed· blocked hover any attempt for the shooter, its xG and everything the model saw
How to read this map

One rink, both teams: MIN attacks the left net, VAN the right. Every attempt is a Gaussian bump of height = its model xG. The controls switch the surface (xG heatmap ↔ vs league) and the markers; vs league compares this game against a typical NHL team-game under the same filter (2026-27 regular season, 184 games), so a 5v5 view is measured against league 5v5.

A strength or score filter is read from MIN's side and mirrored for VAN: “MIN PP” shows MIN's power-play attempts on the left and VAN's shorthanded attempts on the right — the same minutes of the game at both ends. Empty-net attempts are excluded unless you include them. The Player control narrows the map and the rows beneath it to the attempts by either club while one player was on the ice (for a goalie, while he was in net); his own attempts wear a blue ring. vs league switches off while a player is picked — the league baseline is a whole team-game, which one player's slice is not. Hover any attempt for the shooter, the result, its xG, and the inputs behind it: clock, strength, score, shot type, distance, angle, handedness, rush/rebound, what happened just before, and the goalie or the blocker.

What each side produced

all strengths · regular season
MIN VAN
bars share a scale within each row · the longer bar is the row's leader
Goalson the map
4 2
Expected goals
5.12 1.66
xG%share of xG
76% 24%
High-dangerattempts ≥ 0.20 xG
6 1
Shots on goal
34 17
Attempts
61 44
xG by period · whole game 1st1.1–0.62nd2.9–0.43rd1.2–0.6

The Wild beat the Canucks 4–2 on the road, and the chances agreed: MIN out-created VAN 5.1–1.7 in expected goals. The Wild power play made 1.4 xG on 11 attempts.

Counts come from the shot table behind the map: empty-net attempts and the shootout are excluded, so the goals here can trail the official final by an empty-netter or the shootout's deciding goal. Same numbers as the post-game cards.

As the game went

cumulative MIN − VAN xG · bands = power plays · lines = goals
1ST2ND3RD+1−1+2−2+3−3+4−4MIN AHEAD ▲VAN AHEAD ▼
How to read this

One line: cumulative MIN minus VAN expected goals. Above zero MIN is ahead on chances, below zero VAN is. Shaded bands are power plays in the side's colour; vertical lines are goals.

Skaters

on-ice xG · sorted by net · one game
How to read this

Every skater, sorted by net on-ice expected goals: on-ice xG against to the left of zero, for to the right, his own attempts as the solid bar, a hash at the net. The slim track under the name is ice time.

MIN
against for own net ice time
0.50.5111.51.5222.52.5333.53.50Quinn HughesD26:10+3.13Michael McCarronF14:49+1.84Joel Eriksson EkF20:10+1.73Kirill KaprizovF21:53+1.71Bobby BrinkF13:42+1.64Blake ColemanF14:22+1.62Matt BoldyF22:40+1.60Jared SpurgeonD20:09+1.57Maxim ShabanovF16:04+0.94Nico SturmF12:28+0.57Matt KierstedD12:11+0.43Jonas BrodinD19:03+0.41Tyler PitlickF8:55+0.37Ryan HartmanF12:17+0.33Zach BogosianD16:59+0.16Olli MaattaD18:38-0.18Yakov TreninF12:31-0.24Danila YurovF12:59-0.44
VAN
against for own net ice time
0.50.5111.51.5222.52.50Arshdeep BainsF10:08+0.10Linus KarlssonF14:16-0.31Max SassonF11:13-0.37Tom WillanderD20:30-0.47Zeev BuiumD22:59-0.54Drew O'ConnorF16:28-0.57Jonathan LekkerimakiF12:01-0.58Brendan GallagherF11:10-0.60Liam OhgrenF13:47-0.66Filip ChytilF17:19-0.71Filip HronekD25:39-0.87Marco RossiF16:01-0.99Elias PetterssonD22:35-1.14Jake DeBruskF14:10-1.15Elias PetterssonF19:40-1.22Brock BoeserF18:39-1.27Luke SchennD14:03-1.97Guillaume BriseboisD12:35-2.05

Lines & pairs

most-used 5v5 units · when they played · on-ice xG
How to read this

The forward lines and defence pairs that actually played together most at 5v5, each with when it was on the ice across the game clock (period and power-play bands behind the strip) and on-ice xG against/for while the whole unit was out.

MIN
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF
FORWARD LINESL1Joel Eriksson EkKirill KaprizovMatt Boldy17:40+1.55L2Blake ColemanMichael McCarronBobby Brink8:53+1.66L3Yakov TreninDanila YurovMaxim Shabanov8:01-0.18L4Tyler PitlickRyan HartmanNico Sturm7:19+0.40DEFENCE PAIRSD1Jared SpurgeonQuinn Hughes14:28+1.72D2Jonas BrodinOlli Maatta11:38+0.29D3Zach BogosianMatt Kiersted9:14+0.451ST2ND3RD022
VAN
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF
FORWARD LINESL1Brock BoeserElias PetterssonDrew O'Connor7:33-0.40L2Brendan GallagherJake DeBruskMarco Rossi6:38-0.91L3Filip ChytilJonathan LekkerimakiLiam Ohgren5:37-0.47L4Linus KarlssonArshdeep BainsMax Sasson5:34-0.12DEFENCE PAIRSD1Filip HronekElias Pettersson18:27-0.62D2Tom WillanderZeev Buium16:57+0.03D3Luke SchennGuillaume Brisebois9:46-1.321ST2ND3RD01.51.5

Matchups

5v5 · every skater against every skater, goalies first · hover a cell
MIN won the chances VAN won them full colour = a margin of 0.75 xG or more taller = more time together (full height at 12:00) on together, dead even never on together G = goalie: his row or column is each skater against the whole other team
PickardEriksson EkKaprizovBoldyColemanMcCarronBrinkTreninYurovShabanovPitlickHartmanSturmSpurgeonHughesBrodinMaattaBogosianKierstedMeriläinenBoeserPetterssonO'ConnorGallagherDeBruskRossiChytilLekkerimakiOhgrenKarlssonBainsSassonHronekPetterssonWillanderBuiumSchennBriseboisGL1L2L3L4D1D2D3GL1L2L3L4D1D2D3
How to read this

Rows are MIN's skaters, columns VAN's, grouped the way they played: forward lines (L1 = the line that played together most), then defence pairs. Each cell covers the five-on-five time those two players shared the ice. Its colour is the club that out-chanced the other in that time — expected goals for minus against — and the stronger the colour, the bigger the margin. Each cell is also raised: the taller the block, the longer the two shared the ice, up to full height at 12:00 of five-on-five time. A grey cell means they met and it came out even; an open, flat one means they never met at five-on-five.

The first row and column are the goalies. A goalie is in net for every five-on-five second, so a skater's cell against the other side's goalie is all of that skater's five-on-five time against that team — the rest of his row or column added up — and the corner where the two goalies meet is the game's five-on-five. Those cells cover far more time than any pair, so they reach full colour sooner and stand at full height, a wall along each edge of the grid. A goalie change adds a second goalie row or column, each covering his own time.

Linemates share the ice, so a line against a line reads as a block. The margin is a total, not a rate: a long matchup has room to build a big gap and a thirty-second one does not — which is what the height is there to show: a tall, strong cell is the game's story; a short, strong one is a moment. Hover (or tap) any cell for the exact time together, the xG each way, attempts and goals. One game — a strong cell is what happened, not what would happen again.

Goals

xG = the chance, before it went in
TeamScorerPeriodTimexG
MINMaxim Shabanov 1st18:33 PP 0.19
MINBobby Brink 2nd5:54 0.48
MINQuinn Hughes 2nd12:55 PP 0.40
MINKirill Kaprizov 3rd3:38 0.17
VANMax Sasson 3rd6:24 0.22
VANBrock Boeser 3rd16:53 0.06

The prediction, scored

Before puck drop the engine made MIN a 59.2% favorite, expecting a 3.44–2.90 game — MIN won 4–2, so the call landed. Every number in this section was issued before the game and is never re-graded.

pred. xGactual xG pred. 5v5actual 5v5 pred. STactual PP
MIN 3.445.12 2.303.56 1.051.36
VAN 2.901.66 1.991.26 0.710.33

Predicted 5v5 / special-teams portions come from the predicted 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 columns are the card's own counts (empty-net attempts excluded); the actual PP column is power-play xG only, the same bucket the predicted map's special-teams view draws.

The pregame score grid

The likeliest finals the engine saw before the game, with what actually happened marked — ■ MIN · ■ VAN.

Likeliest finals (MIN–VAN)probability
3–3 6.9% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
2–2 6.2% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
4–2 4.5% what happened
4–4 4.3% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
3–1 3.7%
3.2%5.6%011.1%16.1%118.9%23.1%221.5%22.2%318.6%16.1%413.0%9.4%57.6%4.6%63.8%1.9%72.5%1.0%8+

Scoreline odds are the engine's own grid: each team's goals as a Poisson count, with the fitted adjustment for how often games end tied after regulation (ρ = 0.35), so these odds and the headline win probability come from the same numbers. 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 59.2% favorite — VAN controls 45.7% of the predicted xG. Of MIN's 3.44 expected goals, 2.30 should come at 5v5 and 1.05 on the power play; VAN projects 1.99 at 5v5 and 0.71 on the power play. The logistic challenger put the home side at 38.8%, Elo at 40.0%.

Why MIN 59.2%
win chance× expected goals
5v5 play +16.2 MIN ×1.17 · VAN ×0.86
schedule −5.2 MIN ×0.94 · VAN ×1.05
home ice −3.4 MIN ×1.00 · VAN ×1.08
goaltending +2.7 MIN ×1.05 · VAN ×1.00
finishing −0.6 MIN ×1.02 · VAN ×1.04
special teams +0.4 MIN ×1.00 · VAN ×0.99

Win chance is in points toward MIN (bars right of the line push toward MIN, left toward VAN). Each win-chance number is one-at-a-time: that piece reset to league average (neutral ice, a typical night's rest) on both sides and the game re-priced; the pieces interact, so they don't add up to the call. The multipliers are exact: a league-average team on neutral ice, on a typical night's rest, would expect 2.89 goals in this game, and each side's expected goals is that times its column of multipliers. Special teams reads small because the engine's power-play terms fit near zero, not because special teams don't matter.

Where the engine expected the goals

The predicted surface, issued before puck drop — not this game's shots (those are the card's map above). MIN attacks the left net, VAN the right; each end multiplies where the attacking team generates xG this season by where its opponent concedes it, scaled so each end totals the engine's expected goals. Actual shots lays the game's unblocked attempts on top: × goals, • on net, ◦ missed.

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.

MINVAN
3.42 (5th) Offense
xG for / game
2.14 (32nd)
2.61 (7th) Defense
xG against / game
3.85 (32nd)
1.01 (2nd) Power play
PP xG / game
0.47 (31st)
0.74 (17th) Penalty kill
PP xG conceded / game
1.03 (31st)

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 →