Thu, Oct 9, 2025·Ball Arena, Denver
Utah Mammoth 1, Colorado Avalanche 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Mammoth win this game 50% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 011 | 111 | 011 | 133 |
| COL | 114 | 04 | 19 | 227 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 10:57COLRoss ColtonAssists: Jack Drury, Victor Olofsson · Snap, 0.17 xG0–1
- P2 17:48UTADylan GuentherPPAssists: Clayton Keller, Nick Schmaltz · Slap, 0.06 xG1–1
- P3 2:52COLNathan MacKinnonPPGWGAssists: Cale Makar, Martin Necas · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–2
Penalties (7)
- P1 18:09COLGabriel Landeskog: Interference2 min
- P2 6:37UTABrandon Tanev: Tripping2 min
- P2 10:40UTANate Schmidt: Tripping2 min
- P2 17:44COLParker Kelly: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P3 1:53UTAIan Cole: Interference2 min · PPG
- P3 4:51COLJosh Manson: Interference2 min
- P3 11:40UTAJack McBain: Delaying game puck over glass2 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 20:00MacKinnon won the faceoff against Stenlund
- 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 Mammoth
Forward lines
- bestSchmaltz – Keller – McBain11:18
xG 0.68–0.06 (91%)attempts 13–11goals 0–0
- Crouse – Stenlund – Tanev2:13
xG 0.16–0.01 (95%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- Agozzino – Tanev – Peterka2:40
xG 0.19–0.05 (80%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Cooley2:14
xG 0.10–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSchmidt – Durzi10:53
xG 0.64–0.44 (59%)attempts 12–12goals 0–1
- Cole – Durzi2:23
xG 0.19–0.09 (68%)attempts 3–5goals 0–0
- Cole – Simashev8:56
xG 0.12–0.23 (34%)attempts 6–12goals 0–0
Colorado Avalanche
Forward lines
- bestOlofsson – Colton – Drury7:16
xG 0.48–0.09 (84%)attempts 13–4goals 1–0
- Lehkonen – MacKinnon – Necas12:05
xG 0.39–0.45 (46%)attempts 17–15goals 0–0
- Kelly – Kiviranta – Brindley5:40
xG 0.09–0.22 (30%)attempts 8–8goals 0–0
- Nelson – Landeskog – Nichushkin9:58
xG 0.24–0.74 (24%)attempts 7–17goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBurns – Girard12:19
xG 0.69–0.43 (62%)attempts 19–14goals 1–0
- Toews – Makar12:47
xG 0.35–0.31 (53%)attempts 17–14goals 0–0
- Manson – Malinski9:10
xG 0.27–0.26 (51%)attempts 11–8goals 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.
COL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line COL 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 Mammoth win this game 50% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (COL − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).