IACentral Division · 6th of 7 · Minnesota Wild

IowaWild

Casey's Center, Des Moines, IA

27-36-9
Record: 63
Points: 179
Goals for: 226
Against: -47
Differential

At home11-20-590–127 (-37)

On the road16-16-489–99 (-10)

Last 105-5-0 · oldest first

The story

IA were a suppression team: 8th of 32 in chances allowed, but only 32nd of 32 in chances created.

They conceded 40 more than the chances against were worth (23rd of 32 in save percentage).

The power play was 25th of 32 at 17.0%.

Where IA ranks

Expected Goals For % · 20 of 32

49.11%

xGF/60 · 32 of 32

2.44

xGA/60 · 8 of 32

2.53

Scoring Chance % · 30 of 32

46.65%

High Danger Chance % · 20 of 32

48.56%

Shooting % · 31 of 32

9.16%

Save % · 23 of 32

88.7%

PDO · 31 of 32

97.8%

Power Play % · 25 of 32

16.97%

Penalty Kill % · 19 of 32

80.85%

Special Teams Index · 22 of 32

97.83%

Rush Share of Goals · 14 of 32

41.3%

Goals For · 31 of 32

179

Goals Against · 16 of 32

226

Each bar is a percentile against all 32 clubs, with the league median on the tick. Metrics where less is better are flipped, so longer is always better.

Shots for and against

IA1,955 shots · 179 xG

quiet2.8 xG per 5 ft

Allowed1,992 shots · 186 xG

quiet2.8 xG per 5 ft

Special teams

	Goals	Chances	Rate
Power play	46	271	17.0%
Penalty kill	45	235	80.9%

Special-teams index 97.8 — power play plus penalty kill, the one number that says whether a club wins the nights the referee decides.

How the game unfolds

1st period44.0%of goals scored

Goals: 55–70
xG share: 48.9%

2nd period41.1%of goals scored

Goals: 53–76
xG share: 49.8%

3rd period47.4%of goals scored

Goals: 64–71
xG share: 47.2%

	1st	2nd	3rd
Goals for	55	53	64
Goals against	70	76	71
xG for	54.7	65.6	53.8
xG against	57.1	66.1	60.3
Shots for	635	681	608
Shots against	642	679	649

Share of goals is this club’s goals as a percentage of every goal scored in that period, so 50% is even. xG share is the same sum over chance quality, which says whether the result matched the play. Regulation only — overtime is three skaters a side and a different game.

How the goals came

Goals	For	Share	Against	Share
Off the rush	74	41.3%	91	40.3%
Off the cycle	81	45.3%	105	46.5%
In a scramble	21	11.7%	27	11.9%

Attempts	For	Sh%	Against	Sv%
Off the rush	402	18.4%	467	80.5%
Off the cycle	1439	5.6%	1415	92.6%
In a scramble	114	18.4%	110	75.5%

A rush is the first shot of a possession, taken inside 40 ft up the middle; the cycle is a shot after sustained pressure, or a first shot from distance or the wall; a scramble is a second attempt inside four seconds. League-wide they convert at about 17%, 8% and 23%. Shares are of goals scored in play — shootout winners are not shots.

Volume

	For	Against
Shots	1955	1992
Expected goals	179.2	185.7
Scoring chances	584	—
High-danger chances	270	—

With a lead, level, and from behind

Score state	Share of play	GF–GA	GF%	GF% ex. EN	xGF%	SF%	Sh%ex. EN	Sv%ex. EN
Leading	25%1,082 min	48–48	50.0%lg 52.5%	43.5%lg 47.9%	48.4%lg 48.0%	47.9%lg 46.6%	8.1%lg 10.4%	90.6%lg 90.4%
Tied	34%1,468 min	50–70	41.7%lg 50.0%	41.7%lg 50.0%	48.2%lg 50.0%	48.4%lg 50.0%	7.6%lg 9.6%	90.0%lg 90.4%
Trailing	41%1,770 min	74–99	42.8%lg 47.5%	46.3%lg 52.1%	49.3%lg 51.9%	51.2%lg 53.6%	9.3%lg 9.6%	88.5%lg 89.6%

Regulation only — overtime is three-on-three and always starts level, so pooling it here would contaminate every rate. The small figure under each percentage is the league in the same score state; IA being above it is the claim, not the percentage itself. GF% ex. EN drops empty-net goals from both sides, and across the league it reverses the headline: clubs are outscored at even play while protecting a lead, and outscore while chasing. The empty net is what settles it.

2025-26 skaters · 40

Player	GP	G	A	P	SOG	ixG
Gerry MayhewC	60	22	20	42	119	16.44
Nicolas Aubé-KubelRW	62	15	22	37	102	12.14
David ŠpačekD	59	7	29	36	122	6.04
Dylan GambrellC	35	10	26	36	78	9.77
Ben JonesC	37	12	20	32	95	12.01
Hunter HaightF	54	18	14	32	112	12.71
Oskar OlaussonF	63	12	17	29	120	13.04
Boris KatchoukLW	46	11	14	25	58	7.15
Jean-Luc FoudyRW	68	5	20	25	100	9.68
Riley HeidtC	71	8	17	25	61	6.84
David JiříčekD	39	4	19	23	103	5.46
Ben GleasonD	59	2	20	22	85	4.90
Caedan BankierC	66	10	10	20	121	14.45
Carson LambosD	70	8	11	19	111	5.54
Jack PeartD	61	4	11	15	70	3.03
Tyler PitlickF	20	10	5	15	44	6.93
Bradley MarekF	59	7	5	12	56	5.08
Matt KierstedD	49	4	8	12	115	5.38
Ryan SandelinF	58	4	5	9	78	7.17
Wyatt NewpowerD	53	2	7	9	42	1.48
Michael MilneF	39	2	4	6	50	4.73
Liam ÖhgrenLW	9	3	2	5	25	2.28
Rasmus KumpulainenF	48	1	4	5	44	4.12
Will ZmolekD	44	1	4	5	24	1.28
Elliot DesnoyersLW	18	1	3	4	19	2.51
Jaxon NelsonF	19	2	2	4	21	2.03
Mark LiwiskiF	49	4	0	4	34	3.24
Roman SchmidtD	48	0	3	3	43	1.98
D.J. KingD	18	0	2	2	12	0.56
Michael KosterD	13	0	2	2	10	0.49
Cameron ButlerRW	16	1	0	1	13	1.12
Viking Gustafsson NybergD	2	0	1	1	3	0.18
Ben DexheimerD	2	0	0	0	4	0.18
Braidan Simmons-FischerD	6	0	0	0	2	0.28
Lukas SillingerLW	5	0	0	0	5	0.59
Matthew SopLW	3	0	0	0	2	0.35
Rieger LorenzLW	3	0	0	0	5	0.44
Ryan BottrillF	5	0	0	0	4	0.48
Ryan McGuireF	2	0	0	0	1	0.05
Stevie LeskovarD	5	0	0	0	3	0.18

2025-26 goaltending

Goalie	GP	W	SV%	GAA	GSAx
Cal Petersen	33	13	89.6%	2.73	-8.5
Samuel Hlavaj	22	7	88.7%	3.28	-12.7
William Rousseau	12	3	90.8%	2.69	-1.7
Riley Mercer	8	4	89.9%	2.60	0.6
Chase Wutzke	1	0	83.8%	6.09	-2.0

Full schedule · 72 regular

Recent Full schedule

Date	Opp	Result	Goals	xG
2025-10-11	vs CHI	L	1–4	1.9–2.9
2025-10-12	vs RFD	L	2–6	2.3–4.4
2025-10-17	@ CLT	L	2–6	3.4–2.6
2025-10-18	@ CLT	L	1–4	0.9–2.6
2025-10-24	@ TEX	W	3–1	3.2–0.8
2025-10-25	@ TEX	W	2–0	2.2–1.7
2025-10-28	vs GR	OTL	3–4	4.6–2.7
2025-11-01	vs TUC	L	0–3	1.9–1.5
2025-11-02	vs TUC	W	5–4	2.2–3.7
2025-11-06	vs CHI	W	3–2	1.9–2.8
2025-11-08	@ CHI	L	0–4	3.0–4.1
2025-11-09	vs RFD	L	2–3	2.0–1.8
2025-11-14	vs CLT	L	3–4	2.4–3.4
2025-11-15	vs CLT	L	0–2	1.9–2.2
2025-11-18	vs TEX	W	3–1	2.3–1.8
2025-11-22	@ TOR	L	2–7	2.4–2.9
2025-11-23	@ TOR	L	1–2	2.1–2.6
2025-11-26	@ MIL	L	2–7	2.7–3.1
2025-11-28	@ GR	L	2–3	3.7–2.7
2025-11-30	@ GR	L	0–1	2.3–2.7
2025-12-03	@ MIL	L	0–3	1.6–2.5
2025-12-06	vs MB	W	3–0	2.4–3.5
2025-12-07	vs MB	L	3–4	1.8–3.4
2025-12-10	vs RFD	L	3–4	3.7–2.3
2025-12-12	@ MB	L	1–6	2.0–3.7
2025-12-14	@ MB	W	6–0	2.8–2.6
2025-12-17	vs GR	L	2–5	1.7–2.4
2025-12-19	vs GR	L	2–6	1.5–2.6
2025-12-20	@ CHI	W	1–0	2.0–2.8
2025-12-27	vs CHI	W	2–1	3.8–1.5
2025-12-30	vs TEX	W	4–1	2.5–3.7
2025-12-31	vs TEX	OTL	2–3	3.8–2.7
2026-01-04	@ ONT	L	0–3	1.6–3.0
2026-01-07	@ ONT	L	3–4	2.4–2.2
2026-01-09	@ TUC	OTL	1–2	1.9–2.6
2026-01-10	@ TUC	OTL	4–5	3.4–2.5
2026-01-16	vs TOR	L	2–3	1.9–2.8
2026-01-17	vs TOR	L	4–5	2.6–2.6
2026-01-21	vs TEX	L	4–6	2.6–3.1
2026-01-23	vs MIL	OTL	2–3	2.5–2.5
2026-01-24	@ MIL	L	2–4	2.6–3.9
2026-01-30	vs MIL	W	3–2	2.9–1.4
2026-01-31	vs MIL	W	2–1	2.4–1.7
2026-02-06	@ RFD	W	5–2	2.5–2.5
2026-02-13	vs SPR	L	3–6	1.8–2.9
2026-02-14	vs SPR	L	6–8	4.2–2.8
2026-02-19	@ CHI	L	0–2	1.3–2.0
2026-02-21	@ MB	W	3–2	3.3–2.6
2026-02-22	@ MB	W	5–1	3.0–1.6
2026-02-24	vs MIL	W	2–1	2.5–1.6
2026-02-27	@ GR	W	3–2	2.4–2.9
2026-02-28	@ GR	L	2–6	2.3–2.0
2026-03-06	@ SPR	W	2–0	1.7–2.1
2026-03-07	@ SPR	W	2–1	2.0–2.1
2026-03-11	@ CHI	W	4–2	3.4–2.4
2026-03-14	@ RFD	OTL	3–4	3.2–1.5
2026-03-20	vs ONT	W	4–1	2.8–1.9
2026-03-21	vs ONT	L	1–3	2.4–2.0
2026-03-22	@ CHI	W	6–4	2.9–3.2
2026-03-25	vs CHI	OTL	3–4	3.6–2.8
2026-03-28	@ RFD	OTL	2–3	2.9–2.1
2026-03-29	vs RFD	OTL	3–4	3.2–1.9
2026-04-01	vs CHI	L	0–5	2.7–2.2
2026-04-03	vs RFD	L	2–5	1.4–3.0
2026-04-04	@ RFD	W	4–0	2.7–1.1
2026-04-07	@ TEX	W	5–2	2.2–2.7
2026-04-08	@ TEX	W	4–0	2.7–2.5
2026-04-10	@ RFD	W	5–4	2.7–3.2
2026-04-12	@ MIL	L	1–2	2.1–2.6
2026-04-15	vs GR	L	2–5	2.3–3.2
2026-04-17	vs MB	W	3–2	1.6–3.3
2026-04-18	vs MB	L	1–6	1.7–4.0