Fri, Mar 14, 2025·Climate Pledge Arena, Seattle
Utah Hockey Club 2, Seattle Kraken 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Seattle Kraken win this game 65% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 16 | 111 | 08 | 225 |
| SEA | 110 | 16 | 27 | 423 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 0:51SEAEeli TolvanenAssists: Chandler Stephenson · Wrist, 0.03 xG0–1
- P1 16:48UTANick SchmaltzAssists: Kevin Stenlund, John Marino · Wrist, 0.09 xG1–1
- P2 7:35UTAKevin StenlundAssists: John Marino, Michael Carcone · Wrist, 0.23 xG2–1
- P2 18:54SEABrandon MontourAssists: Jordan Eberle, Eeli Tolvanen · Deflected, 0.15 xG2–2
- P3 10:29SEAKaapo KakkoGWGUnassisted · Wrap-around, 0.08 xG2–3
- P3 18:51SEAEeli TolvanenENAssists: Jordan Eberle · Wrist, 0.69 xG2–4
Penalties (5)
- P1 2:58UTALogan Cooley: Slashing2 min
- P1 12:16SEAKaapo Kakko: Cross checking2 min
- P1 14:35UTAKevin Stenlund: High sticking2 min
- P2 0:26SEAJaden Schwartz: Hooking2 min
- P3 4:44UTAMichael Kesselring: 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 20:00Hayton won the faceoff against Beniers
- 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
- bestCrouse – McBain – Doan10:16
xG 0.67–0.42 (61%)attempts 13–8goals 0–0
- Kerfoot – Hayton – Guenther10:06
xG 0.44–0.22 (67%)attempts 8–11goals 0–1
- O'Brien – Stenlund – Carcone6:48
xG 0.31–0.14 (69%)attempts 10–6goals 1–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Cooley10:58
xG 0.51–0.70 (42%)attempts 16–13goals 0–2
Defence pairs
- bestMarino – Sergachev13:48
xG 1.21–0.55 (69%)attempts 18–17goals 1–2
- Maatta – Durzi13:40
xG 0.46–0.45 (51%)attempts 17–12goals 0–1
- Cole – Kesselring12:08
xG 0.43–0.67 (39%)attempts 16–11goals 1–0
Seattle Kraken
Forward lines
- bestSchwartz – Kakko – Beniers11:05
xG 1.14–0.35 (77%)attempts 18–14goals 1–0
- Burakovsky – McCann – Nyman8:18
xG 0.27–0.25 (52%)attempts 6–7goals 0–0
- Eberle – Stephenson – Tolvanen10:06
xG 0.38–0.62 (38%)attempts 8–13goals 2–1
- Eyssimont – Kartye – Wright6:25
xG 0.06–0.40 (13%)attempts 4–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestOleksiak – Montour14:15
xG 0.65–0.38 (63%)attempts 14–13goals 2–0
- Mahura – Fleury11:20
xG 0.38–0.12 (76%)attempts 8–15goals 0–0
- Montour – Dunn3:55
xG 0.16–0.33 (33%)attempts 6–7goals 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.
SEA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line SEA 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, Seattle Kraken win this game 65% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (SEA − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).