Mon, Oct 13, 2025·United Center, Chicago
Utah Mammoth 1, Chicago Blackhawks 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 56% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 05 | 013 | 14 | 122 |
| CHI | 06 | 13 | 25 | 314 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 9:21CHIIlya MikheyevAssists: Jason Dickinson, Ryan Donato · Wrist, 0.17 xG0–1
- P3 1:02UTAJJ PeterkaAssists: Dylan Guenther, John Marino · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–1
- P3 8:55CHIAndre BurakovskyPPGWGAssists: Nick Foligno, Colton Dach · Wrist, 0.15 xG1–2
- P3 19:54CHIIlya MikheyevENAssists: Teuvo Teravainen · Wrist, 0.79 xG1–3
Penalties (6)
- P1 4:58UTADmitri Simashev: Holding2 min
- P1 7:24CHILouis Crevier: Tripping2 min
- P2 10:59CHISam Rinzel: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P3 8:02UTAMikhail Sergachev: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P3 11:41CHIConnor Bedard: Holding2 min
- P3 16:56UTAJohn Marino: High sticking2 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 20:00Nazar 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 – Hayton11:08
xG 0.53–0.00 (100%)attempts 16–0goals 0–0
- Crouse – Stenlund – Tanev2:05
xG 0.03–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Peterka – Guenther – Cooley10:59
xG 0.62–0.62 (50%)attempts 13–11goals 1–0
- Stenlund – Tanev – Yamamoto7:57
xG 0.02–0.19 (10%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSchmidt – Marino13:06
xG 0.64–0.33 (66%)attempts 18–3goals 1–1
- Maatta – Sergachev9:23
xG 0.30–0.19 (61%)attempts 8–4goals 0–0
- Cole – Maatta4:48
xG 0.06–0.01 (87%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestDickinson – Donato – Mikheyev6:54
xG 1.08–0.13 (90%)attempts 13–5goals 1–0
- Burakovsky – Dach – Bedard10:05
xG 0.07–0.25 (21%)attempts 4–6goals 0–0
- Teravainen – Bertuzzi – Nazar10:36
xG 0.18–0.55 (25%)attempts 2–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestGrzelcyk – Levshunov5:28
xG 0.35–0.09 (80%)attempts 4–5goals 1–0
- Murphy – Kaiser4:03
xG 0.24–0.09 (72%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Murphy – Grzelcyk6:55
xG 0.40–0.27 (59%)attempts 7–8goals 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.
CHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CHI 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, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 56% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).