Wed, Nov 13, 2024·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
Carolina Hurricanes 1, Utah Hockey Club 4
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Carolina Hurricanes win this game 92% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAR | 015 | 117 | 018 | 150 |
| UTA | 18 | 05 | 38 | 421 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 17:55UTANick BjugstadUnassisted · Snap, 0.15 xG0–1
- P2 10:04CARMartin NecasPPAssists: Shayne Gostisbehere, Sebastian Aho · Slap, 0.06 xG1–1
- P3 5:09UTAJack McBainGWGAssists: Michael Kesselring · Snap, 0.13 xG1–2
- P3 7:11UTAMikhail SergachevAssists: Dylan Guenther, Matias Maccelli · Snap, 0.11 xG1–3
- P3 7:28UTANick BjugstadAssists: Michael Kesselring, Clayton Keller · Snap, 0.31 xG1–4
Penalties (8)
- P1 13:42CARSebastian Aho: Hooking2 min
- P2 9:13UTAIan Cole: Holding2 min · PPG
- P2 11:42UTAIan Cole: Holding2 min
- P3 8:03UTAMichael Carcone: Instigator2 min
- P3 8:03UTAMichael Carcone: Fighting5 min
- P3 8:03UTAMichael Carcone: Aggressor10 min
- P3 14:29UTAMaveric Lamoureux: Hooking2 min
- P3 17:07UTANick Bjugstad: Delaying game2 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 20:00Staal won the faceoff against Hayton
- 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.
Carolina Hurricanes
Forward lines
- bestAho – Roslovic – Svechnikov8:57
xG 0.59–0.23 (71%)attempts 17–12goals 0–0
- Staal – Martinook – Carrier9:53
xG 0.66–0.36 (65%)attempts 9–10goals 0–0
- Jost – Drury – Blake7:22
xG 0.39–0.11 (79%)attempts 15–5goals 0–0
- Necas – Robinson – Kotkaniemi9:02
xG 0.62–1.02 (38%)attempts 11–10goals 0–3
Defence pairs
- bestGostisbehere – Walker10:05
xG 0.87–0.35 (71%)attempts 19–6goals 0–1
- Burns – Slavin13:49
xG 0.71–0.74 (49%)attempts 23–15goals 0–1
- Orlov – Chatfield15:52
xG 0.77–1.01 (43%)attempts 18–23goals 0–2
Utah Hockey Club
Forward lines
- Bjugstad – Schmaltz – Keller9:45
xG 0.66–0.77 (46%)attempts 6–15goals 1–0
- Kerfoot – Crouse – Hayton9:41
xG 0.16–0.28 (37%)attempts 14–11goals 0–0
- Maccelli – Guenther – Cooley10:26
xG 0.44–0.79 (36%)attempts 12–14goals 1–0
- Stenlund – Carcone – McBain7:46
xG 0.15–0.85 (15%)attempts 6–18goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCole – Lamoureux12:20
xG 0.86–0.43 (66%)attempts 16–13goals 1–0
- Maatta – Sergachev14:26
xG 0.24–0.68 (27%)attempts 14–19goals 0–0
- Välimäki – Kesselring9:07
xG 0.10–0.98 (9%)attempts 3–23goals 0–0
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 CAR. 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, Carolina Hurricanes win this game 92% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − CAR), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).