Tue, Feb 25, 2025·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
Chicago Blackhawks 1, Utah Hockey Club 2
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Hockey Club win this game 81% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | 15 | 011 | 06 | 122 |
| UTA | 08 | 114 | 115 | 237 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 13:34CHISeth JonesPPAssists: Ryan Donato, Teuvo Teravainen · Snap, 0.08 xG1–0
- P2 19:16UTAClayton KellerAssists: Michael Kesselring, Logan Cooley · Snap, 0.17 xG1–1
- P3 12:12UTALawson CrouseGWGAssists: Josh Doan, Olli Maatta · Backhand, 0.05 xG1–2
Penalties (9)
- P1 1:15CHIFrank Nazar: Holding2 min
- P1 10:08CHIConnor Murphy: Roughing2 min
- P1 12:47UTAKevin Stenlund: Holding2 min · PPG
- P1 15:14CHIPhilipp Kurashev: Slashing2 min
- P2 11:07CHIConnor Bedard: Hooking2 min
- P2 14:28UTAMichael Carcone: Cross checking2 min
- P2 16:30CHICraig Smith: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P2 16:30UTASean Durzi: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P3 8:04CHIAlex Vlasic: Roughing2 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 20:00Foligno won the faceoff against McBain
- 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.
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- Donato – Slaggert – Dach4:12
xG 0.01–0.26 (5%)attempts 3–9goals 0–0
- Bertuzzi – Nazar – Bedard8:27
xG 0.11–0.41 (21%)attempts 3–12goals 0–0
- Maroon – Smith – Kurashev5:39
xG 0.15–0.51 (23%)attempts 4–11goals 0–1
- Foligno – Teravainen – Mikheyev8:43
xG 0.17–0.65 (21%)attempts 3–14goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Jones – Del Mastro2:47
xG 0.13–0.24 (36%)attempts 1–4goals 0–0
- Allan – Del Mastro9:51
xG 0.00–0.35 (0%)attempts 2–15goals 0–0
- Martinez – Jones12:30
xG 0.26–0.87 (23%)attempts 7–18goals 0–1
Utah Hockey Club
Forward lines
- bestCrouse – McBain – Doan8:59
xG 0.98–0.01 (99%)attempts 23–1goals 1–0
- Bjugstad – Kerfoot – Stenlund7:16
xG 0.69–0.07 (91%)attempts 14–2goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Cooley9:45
xG 0.43–0.20 (69%)attempts 16–5goals 1–0
- Carcone – Hayton – Guenther7:11
xG 0.42–0.22 (66%)attempts 8–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCole – Kesselring11:26
xG 1.46–0.21 (87%)attempts 31–8goals 1–0
- Maatta – Durzi12:25
xG 0.63–0.14 (82%)attempts 21–3goals 1–0
- Marino – Sergachev12:45
xG 0.51–0.27 (65%)attempts 12–6goals 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 CHI. 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 81% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − CHI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).