Minnesota United vs Portland Timbers: match statistics
Minnesota United vs Portland Timbers: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Minnesota United played Portland Timbers in MLS (United States). The match was played on 19 April 2026. Final score: 2:0.
Current form
Minnesota United: 2-1-2, 1.40 points/match. Portland Timbers: 1-1-3, 0.80 points/match.
Goal statistics
Minnesota United scores 1.14 and concedes 1.86 goals per match. Portland Timbers scores 1.57 and concedes 2.29. League average: 3.12 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Minnesota United 57%, Portland Timbers 86%. Over 2.5: Minnesota United 71%, Portland Timbers 71%. League level: BTTS 57%, Over 2.5 63%.
xG, shots and style
Minnesota United has higher xG: 1.36 vs 1.26. Minnesota United: 12.4 shots per match, Portland Timbers: 10.6.
Match halves
Minnesota United: half-time lead 14%, second-half goals 0.57. Portland Timbers: half-time lead 43%, second-half goals 0.57.
Goals by minute
Minnesota United: 31-45+ (3 goals). Portland Timbers: 31-45+ (4 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
MLS: 3.12 goals per match, BTTS 57%, Over 2.5 63%.
Head-to-head
No aligned head-to-head sample is available in the database.
Archived pre-match analysis
This analysis was prepared before kick-off. The conclusions use only information available before the match and do not include the final result or post-match statistics.
General match analysis
I assess that the hosts have the advantage and should win: Minnesota United at home have a 50% win share and have kept 100% clean sheets, averaging 0.00 goals conceded at home. Portland Timbers away perform very poorly — they have lost all away matches (100%) and concede on average 2.67 goals per away game, with 0% clean sheets. In terms of quality of chances xG is similar (Minnesota generates 1.26 xG at home vs 1.36 xG for Portland away), but the visitors allow significantly more xG against (2.36 vs 1.48), indicating a higher risk of conceding clear chances. Portland register slightly more shots on target away (5 vs 4) and have a higher conversion rate (11% vs 4%), yet in the last 5 matches Timbers scored 8 and conceded 12, while Minnesota scored 4 and conceded 8 in the same period, demonstrating greater defensive stability from the hosts. Considering Minnesota’s better recent form over the last 5 matches (1.6 points per game vs 0.8 for Portland) and Portland’s disastrous away stats, I give the hosts the higher probability of victory.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
A strong case for BTTS - Yes comes from seasonal statistics: Minnesota has BTTS in 100% of matches, Portland 67%, while the league average is 56%. Both teams defend poorly — Minnesota concedes 2.00 goals per match on average, Portland 2.67, and in the last 5 matches they conceded 1.6 and 2.4 respectively, indicating consistency in goals conceded. Portland scored 8 goals in their last 5 (1.6 per match) and has 100% BTTS in that period, whereas Minnesota has 4 goals in their last 5 (0.8) but seasonally scores 1.75 goals with xG 1.19 and a 19% shot conversion rate. Additionally, both sides have 0% clean sheets this season and high rates of matches over 2.5 goals (75% Minnesota, 67% Portland), while the league averages 3.1 goals per match, so I expect both teams to find the net. In summary, given Minnesota’s 100% seasonal BTTS, Portland’s 100% BTTS in the last 5, and high goals conceded averages of 2.0 and 2.67, I tip BTTS = Yes with a probability of 80% versus 20% for No.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Both teams have 100% of matches this season over 1.5 goals (Minnesota 100%, Portland 100%), which is a very strong signal for Over 1.5. xG estimate: Minnesota’s attacking xG 1.19 versus Portland’s xG against 2.36 yields about 1.78 expected goals for the home side, and Portland’s xG 1.36 versus Minnesota’s xG against 2.00 yields about 1.68 for the visitors; total expected is 3.46. Minnesota averages 9.25 shots with a 19% conversion and 4.5 shots on target, Portland averages 12.33 shots with an 11% conversion and 5.0 shots on target, so both sides create chances while the hosts convert more efficiently. Season Over 2.5 rates are 75% for Minnesota and 67% for Portland, and BTTS is 100% for Minnesota and 67% for Portland, supporting Over 2.5 (estimate ~72%), however Minnesota’s last 5 matches average only 0.8 goals per game, which reduces confidence in Over 3.5. Therefore I recommend playing Over 1.5 (probability ~98%) as the strongest and safest pick.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
Portland led at the break in 67% of their matches but lost 100% of those games, indicating frequent surrendering of leads after halftime. The visitors create more chances — averaging 12.33 shots and 1.36 xG versus Minnesota’s 9.25 shots and 1.19 xG — yet they have lower finishing efficiency (11% vs 19%), so they more often hold a lead at the break but fail to maintain the scoreline. Minnesota is stronger after the interval: they average 0.75 goals in the second half versus Portland’s 0.33 and have collected 5 points in second halves while the visitors have 0 points, which favors turnarounds. Additionally, in Minnesota’s matches both teams scored in 100% of games, while in Portland’s matches both teams scored in 67%, so I expect goals from both sides and a home comeback after the break. For these reasons I select the 2/1 scenario (away team leading at half-time, home team wins at full-time), which I assign the highest probability.
View first-half and second-half statisticsHalf-by-half
Match statistics
Pre-match profile— what do the season numbers say?
This is a team profile based on season data and form. Match-flow statistics are shown only after the fixture is played.
Team stats— who is more efficient?
Attack and defence comparison for both teams in the current season.
Shooting quality
| Minnesota United | Portland Timbers | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 35% | 45% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.11 | 0.12 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.27 | 0.33 |
xG per shot around 0.08 usually means long-range attempts; 0.15+ usually means box chances. The style label comes from possession, shot volume and conversion.
* xG (expected goals) says how many goals a team should score from its chances. If actual goals are above xG, finishing is above average; if below xG, chances are being missed.
Team form— who is in better shape?
Last five matches and season record, overall and split by home and away matches.
Minnesota United is 75% better for: last-5 form.
1.4 pts / match - Minnesota United · 0.8 pts / match - Portland Timbers
Goals— how do both teams score and concede?
How many goals both teams score and concede, plus how often they keep a clean sheet or fail to score.
Portland Timbers is 38% better for: goals scored per match.
1.14 goals / match - Minnesota United · 1.57 goals / match - Portland Timbers
Minnesota United is 23% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.86 goals / match - Minnesota United · 2.29 goals / match - Portland Timbers
Minnesota United scores in 71% of matches (5 of 7 matches), while Portland Timbers keeps a clean sheet in 0% (0 of 7 matches).
Portland Timbers scores in 86% of matches (6 of 7 matches), while Minnesota United keeps a clean sheet in 29% (2 of 7 matches).
How often they score at least...
How often they concede at least...
* Statistics include both teams' home and away matches in the current season.
Both teams scored (BTTS)— how often do both teams score?
How often both teams' matches have goals on both sides, compared with the league average.
Goal patterns
BTTS and goal count
Goal count (Over/Under)— how often do these matches cross the goal lines?
How often matches involving these teams clear goal thresholds, in the full match and in each half.
Full match - team comparison (Over)
Over / Under - Minnesota United
Over / Under - Portland Timbers
1st half
2nd half
Match halves— when do the teams score more often?
How teams split performance between first and second half: goals, points, clean sheets and half-time state.
Portland Timbers is 57% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1 pts / match - Minnesota United · 1.57 pts / match - Portland Timbers
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Minnesota United - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 14% of matches and wins 43%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
Portland Timbers - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 43% of matches and wins 29%. Sometimes loses the lead after half-time.
Concedes 0.6 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.4 | 0.8 |
| Average goals in match | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 60% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 40% |
| No goal | 60% | 80% |
| Goal difference | -4 | -2 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 2.00 | 0.40 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.0 | 0.6 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.6 | 1.8 |
| Average goals in match | 1.6 | 2.4 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 80% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 40% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 20% |
| No goal | 20% | 40% |
| Goal difference | +2 | -6 |
* Colours in tables show event frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate, red is rare. It is frequency, not a team rating.
Goals by minute— when do goals arrive?
Match phases in which both teams most often score and concede.
Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (3 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (4). Late-goal balance (76-90): 0.
Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (4 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (5). Late-goal balance (76-90): -2 - late phases are a weakness.
* Buckets 31-45 and 76-90 include added-time goals.
Additional team indicators— what do xG, efficiency and form show?
A comparison of chance quality, results and trends based on completed matches from the current season.
Match profile
Minnesota United
Portland Timbers
* The estimated goal total and split, BTTS estimate, 0:0 risk and goal range are calculated from public season averages and frequencies for both teams. This is a statistical match profile, not a private model prediction or betting pick. The remaining indicators describe completed matches from the season.
League context— is this a high-scoring league?
How both teams compare with league-wide averages (MLS).
Teams vs league
| Minnesota United | Liga | Portland Timbers | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▼ 3.00 | 3.12 | ▲ 3.86 |
| Both teams scored | • 57% | 57% | ▲ 86% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 71% | 63% | ▲ 71% |
| Clean sheets | ▲ 29% | 25% | ▼ 0% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 57% | 73% | ▲ 100% |
| Goal after half-time | ▼ 71% | 81% | ▲ 86% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Lineups and player events
Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.
Home team
Starting lineup
Away team
Starting lineup
Match timeline
Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.
Referee and managers
Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.
FAQ
What was the result of Minnesota United vs Portland Timbers?
The MLS match finished Minnesota United 2:0 Portland Timbers. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Minnesota United vs Portland Timbers?
Minnesota United score 1.14 goals per game on average and Portland Timbers 1.57. The MLS average is 3.12 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 63% of games. Both teams score in 57% of Minnesota United's matches and 86% of Portland Timbers's.
What form are Minnesota United and Portland Timbers in?
Over the last 5 games Minnesota United have a 2-1-2 record (1.40 points per game) and Portland Timbers 1-1-3 (0.80 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Minnesota United vs Portland Timbers?
This page shows the full statistical context — form, head-to-head, goals, BTTS and Over/Under. The tip, value assessment and full reasoning are in the NoFluffPicks app.