Wed, Mar 12, 2025·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
Anaheim Ducks 2, Utah Hockey Club 3
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Hockey Club win this game 87% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 08 | 17 | 16 | 221 |
| UTA | 117 | 114 | 18 | 339 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 11:03UTAJack McBainAssists: Ian Cole, Josh Doan · Tip-in, 0.09 xG0–1
- P2 14:31UTAAlexander KerfootAssists: Dylan Guenther, Barrett Hayton · Snap, 0.10 xG0–2
- P2 15:53ANAAlex KillornAssists: Leo Carlsson, Cutter Gauthier · Snap, 0.05 xG1–2
- P3 3:22ANAMason McTavishPPAssists: Trevor Zegras, Jackson LaCombe · Slap, 0.06 xG2–2
- P3 7:03UTADylan GuentherPPGWGAssists: Mikhail Sergachev, Clayton Keller · Slap, 0.07 xG2–3
Penalties (5)
- P1 15:51ANAMason McTavish: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P2 1:07ANALeo Carlsson: Cross checking2 min
- P2 19:38UTAMikhail Sergachev: Roughing2 min
- P3 1:48UTAMikhail Sergachev: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P3 5:27ANAOlen Zellweger: Hooking2 min · PPG
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 Strome
- 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.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestStrome – Vatrano – Terry5:28
xG 0.55–0.13 (81%)attempts 10–4goals 0–0
- Killorn – Vatrano – Carlsson5:59
xG 0.59–0.36 (62%)attempts 11–12goals 0–0
- Johnston – Lundeström – Leason6:25
xG 0.03–0.17 (14%)attempts 2–10goals 0–0
- Colangelo – McTavish – Gauthier5:32
xG 0.30–0.60 (33%)attempts 5–11goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestGudas – LaCombe18:53
xG 0.86–0.76 (53%)attempts 21–22goals 0–0
- Trouba – Zellweger14:45
xG 0.96–1.40 (41%)attempts 25–27goals 0–2
- Helleson – Mintyukov10:52
xG 0.24–0.91 (21%)attempts 6–18goals 1–0
Utah Hockey Club
Forward lines
- bestCrouse – McBain – Doan8:56
xG 0.85–0.31 (73%)attempts 17–10goals 1–0
- O'Brien – Stenlund – Carcone6:06
xG 0.34–0.10 (76%)attempts 11–7goals 0–0
- Kerfoot – Hayton – Guenther10:53
xG 0.96–0.78 (55%)attempts 18–14goals 1–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Cooley13:07
xG 0.57–0.72 (44%)attempts 18–13goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestMaatta – Durzi13:58
xG 1.30–0.50 (72%)attempts 23–12goals 1–0
- Cole – Kesselring10:45
xG 0.87–0.62 (59%)attempts 27–14goals 1–0
- Cole – Marino2:41
xG 0.00–0.09 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 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 ANA. 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 87% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).