Sat, Dec 7, 2024·KeyBank Center, Buffalo
Utah Hockey Club 5, Buffalo Sabres 2
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Hockey Club win this game 58% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 010 | 313 | 25 | 528 |
| BUF | 17 | 05 | 113 | 225 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 10:14BUFTyson KozakAssists: Beck Malenstyn, Dennis Gilbert · Tip-in, 0.10 xG0–1
- P2 3:18UTAMichael KesselringAssists: Barrett Hayton · Wrist, 0.05 xG1–1
- P2 3:42UTAMikhail SergachevAssists: Alexander Kerfoot, Michael Carcone · Wrist, 0.01 xG2–1
- P2 19:08UTANick SchmaltzGWGAssists: Michael Kesselring, Clayton Keller · Wrist, 0.18 xG3–1
- P3 2:11UTAJack McBainAssists: Logan Cooley, Dylan Guenther · Wrist, 0.27 xG4–1
- P3 12:07UTAKevin StenlundAssists: Olli Maatta, Alexander Kerfoot · Wrist, 0.05 xG5–1
- P3 17:40BUFJiri KulichAssists: Jason Zucker, Owen Power · Wrist, 0.23 xG5–2
Penalties (5)
- P1 12:17UTAIan Cole: Interference2 min
- P1 18:39UTAMikhail Sergachev: Interference2 min
- P2 9:16BUFBeck Malenstyn: Fighting5 min
- P2 9:16UTAMichael Kesselring: Fighting5 min
- P3 6:50UTAIan Cole: Hooking2 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 20:00Kozak won the faceoff against Bjugstad
- 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.
Utah Hockey Club
Forward lines
- bestSchmaltz – Keller – Hayton11:04
xG 1.08–0.23 (82%)attempts 14–10goals 2–0
- McBain – Guenther – Cooley10:26
xG 0.73–0.31 (70%)attempts 7–10goals 1–0
- Bjugstad – Crouse – Maccelli12:47
xG 0.50–0.50 (50%)attempts 13–11goals 0–0
- Kerfoot – Stenlund – Carcone8:18
xG 0.55–0.83 (40%)attempts 11–11goals 2–1
Defence pairs
- bestCole – Kesselring14:20
xG 1.28–0.62 (67%)attempts 18–9goals 2–0
- Maatta – Sergachev14:49
xG 1.13–0.67 (63%)attempts 22–18goals 3–1
- Bortuzzo – Välimäki12:20
xG 0.41–0.27 (60%)attempts 9–15goals 0–0
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- bestZucker – Krebs – Kulich5:08
xG 0.49–0.26 (65%)attempts 8–3goals 1–0
- Tuch – Thompson – McLeod6:32
xG 0.25–0.15 (62%)attempts 8–5goals 0–1
- Aube-Kubel – Malenstyn – Kozak10:43
xG 0.11–0.29 (27%)attempts 3–8goals 1–0
- McLeod – Krebs – Kulich5:21
xG 0.01–0.30 (3%)attempts 5–10goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestClifton – Byram2:31
xG 0.44–0.06 (89%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Bryson – Byram15:06
xG 0.58–0.21 (73%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
- Clifton – Gilbert13:31
xG 0.26–0.87 (23%)attempts 16–19goals 1–2
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.
BUF's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line BUF is favoured, below it UTA. 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 58% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (BUF − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).