Thu, Oct 24, 2024·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
Colorado Avalanche 5, Utah Hockey Club 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Hockey Club win this game 54% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COL | 212 | 210 | 14 | 526 |
| UTA | 05 | 010 | 111 | 126 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 9:54COLRoss ColtonPPAssists: Mikko Rantanen, Casey Mittelstadt · Snap, 0.22 xG1–0
- P1 18:20COLCale MakarGWGAssists: Mikko Rantanen, Nikolai Kovalenko · Snap, 0.07 xG2–0
- P2 14:25COLCasey MittelstadtAssists: Sam Malinski, Nikolai Kovalenko · Wrist, 0.15 xG3–0
- P2 17:33COLIvan IvanPPAssists: Nathan MacKinnon, Casey Mittelstadt · Snap, 0.05 xG4–0
- P3 15:28UTALawson CrouseAssists: Matias Maccelli, Ian Cole · Backhand, 0.11 xG4–1
- P3 16:07COLJoel KivirantaUnassisted · Snap, 0.07 xG5–1
Penalties (7)
- P1 3:17COLJosh Manson: Holding2 min
- P1 7:36UTAMichael Kesselring: Hooking2 min
- P1 8:05UTAIan Cole: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P2 0:44COLJosh Manson: Tripping2 min
- P2 9:38UTALawson Crouse: Interference2 min
- P2 16:08UTADylan Guenther: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P2 18:17COLParker Kelly: 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 20:00Hayton won the faceoff against MacKinnon
- 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.
Colorado Avalanche
Forward lines
- bestMacKinnon – Rantanen – Colton7:20
xG 0.41–0.10 (81%)attempts 6–7goals 0–0
- Mittelstadt – Kovalenko – O'Connor6:23
xG 0.39–0.11 (79%)attempts 8–1goals 1–1
- Wood – Kelly – Kiviranta6:42
xG 0.13–0.14 (48%)attempts 7–8goals 0–0
- Wagner – Stienburg – Ivan3:20
xG 0.00–0.12 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestToews – Makar13:53
xG 0.71–0.22 (76%)attempts 12–11goals 1–0
- de Haan – Malinski12:04
xG 0.32–0.33 (50%)attempts 7–13goals 2–1
- Manson – Girard16:28
xG 0.21–0.73 (23%)attempts 10–13goals 0–0
Utah Hockey Club
Forward lines
- bestKeller – Hayton – Guenther7:41
xG 0.55–0.11 (84%)attempts 12–1goals 0–0
- Kerfoot – Stenlund – Doan4:21
xG 0.29–0.00 (100%)attempts 10–0goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Hayton4:30
xG 0.17–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Kerfoot – Crouse – Doan2:34
xG 0.00–0.02 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSergachev – Kesselring15:05
xG 0.79–0.41 (66%)attempts 24–7goals 0–0
- Cole – Lamoureux15:57
xG 0.46–0.42 (53%)attempts 15–13goals 1–0
- Välimäki – Kolyachonok10:56
xG 0.12–0.51 (19%)attempts 6–10goals 0–3
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.
UTA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line UTA is favoured, below it COL. 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, Utah Hockey Club win this game 54% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − COL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).