Sat, Apr 5, 2025·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
Winnipeg Jets 1, Utah Hockey Club 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Hockey Club win this game 51% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WPG | 07 | 012 | 114 | 133 |
| UTA | 111 | 211 | 16 | 428 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 4:24UTAClayton KellerPPAssists: Barrett Hayton, Nick Schmaltz · Snap, 0.14 xG0–1
- P2 0:57UTABarrett HaytonPPGWGAssists: Dylan Guenther, Clayton Keller · Backhand, 0.14 xG0–2
- P2 16:57UTAKevin StenlundAssists: Mikhail Sergachev, John Marino · Wrist, 0.04 xG0–3
- P3 2:45WPGMark ScheifelePPUnassisted · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–3
- P3 17:19UTANick BjugstadENAssists: Kevin Stenlund, Olli Maatta · Snap, 0.46 xG1–4
Penalties (7)
- P1 4:17WPGDylan Samberg: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P1 4:54UTAKevin Stenlund: Holding2 min
- P1 14:16WPGMorgan Barron: Interference2 min
- P1 19:49WPGMark Scheifele: Holding2 min · PPG
- P2 9:06UTAAlexander Kerfoot: Hooking2 min
- P2 18:06UTAMichael Kesselring: Holding2 min
- P3 1:54UTAOlli Maatta: 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 20:00Scheifele won the faceoff against Kerfoot
- 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.
Winnipeg Jets
Forward lines
- bestNamestnikov – Tanev – Iafallo3:23
xG 0.39–0.00 (100%)attempts 8–3goals 0–0
- Scheifele – Connor – Iafallo6:16
xG 0.41–0.09 (81%)attempts 8–3goals 0–0
- Scheifele – Connor – Perfetti6:38
xG 0.51–0.40 (56%)attempts 11–6goals 0–0
- Anderson-Dolan – Barron – Gustafsson4:36
xG 0.27–0.21 (56%)attempts 6–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMorrissey – Stanley2:11
xG 0.21–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- DeMelo – Stanley3:46
xG 0.14–0.03 (84%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Miller – Morrissey5:32
xG 0.31–0.23 (58%)attempts 12–5goals 0–1
Utah Hockey Club
Forward lines
- bestSchmaltz – Yamamoto – Hayton8:02
xG 0.61–0.08 (88%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0
- Crouse – McBain – Doan6:43
xG 0.25–0.09 (72%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
- Bjugstad – Kerfoot – Stenlund8:36
xG 0.45–0.42 (52%)attempts 10–10goals 1–0
- Keller – Guenther – Cooley12:28
xG 0.55–0.74 (42%)attempts 8–19goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMarino – Sergachev9:50
xG 0.54–0.39 (58%)attempts 11–8goals 1–0
- Cole – Durzi12:44
xG 0.58–0.48 (55%)attempts 10–20goals 0–0
- Maatta – Kesselring12:51
xG 0.17–0.54 (23%)attempts 11–12goals 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 WPG. 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 51% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − WPG), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).