Sun, Nov 2, 2025·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
Tampa Bay Lightning 4, Utah Mammoth 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 72% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 19 | 110 | 27 | 426 |
| UTA | 16 | 09 | 112 | 227 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 5:55UTALawson CrouseAssists: Ian Cole · Snap, 0.13 xG0–1
- P1 15:17TBLYanni GourdeAssists: Emil Lilleberg, Zemgus Girgensons · Snap, 0.16 xG1–1
- P2 2:47TBLAnthony CirelliAssists: Jake Guentzel, Victor Hedman · Slap, 0.05 xG2–1
- P3 2:21UTAKailer YamamotoAssists: Ian Cole · Snap, 0.12 xG2–2
- P3 12:06TBLJake GuentzelGWGUnassisted · Snap, 0.13 xG3–2
- P3 19:44TBLBrandon HagelENAssists: Ryan McDonagh · Wrist, 0.79 xG4–2
Penalties (8)
- P1 9:21UTAKailer Yamamoto: Hooking2 min
- P1 13:01TBLGage Goncalves: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P2 7:29TBLErik Cernak: Holding2 min
- P2 8:56UTALogan Cooley: Holding2 min
- P2 13:02TBLCharle-Edouard D'Astous: Tripping2 min
- P2 19:58UTAJack McBain: Slashing2 min
- P2 19:58TBLAnthony Cirelli: Roughing2 min
- P3 17:01UTAMichael Carcone: Misconduct10 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 Gourde
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestKucherov – Point – Hagel8:22
xG 0.39–0.18 (68%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
- Guentzel – Cirelli – Douglas2:36
xG 0.08–0.06 (58%)attempts 2–3goals 1–0
- Kucherov – Guentzel – Point2:02
xG 0.00–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–0goals 0–0
- Guentzel – Cirelli – Hagel2:13
xG 0.00–0.05 (0%)attempts 1–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHedman – Moser9:13
xG 0.38–0.13 (74%)attempts 14–4goals 1–1
- McDonagh – Cernak14:09
xG 0.58–0.47 (56%)attempts 14–12goals 0–0
- Moser – Lilleberg3:57
xG 0.13–0.14 (48%)attempts 1–5goals 1–0
Utah Mammoth
Forward lines
- bestCrouse – Carcone – McBain7:27
xG 0.36–0.07 (83%)attempts 9–6goals 1–0
- Stenlund – Tanev – Yamamoto7:42
xG 0.16–0.09 (65%)attempts 6–4goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Hayton10:31
xG 0.37–0.36 (51%)attempts 9–11goals 0–2
- Peterka – Guenther – Cooley9:31
xG 0.21–0.46 (31%)attempts 6–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCole – Maatta9:19
xG 0.79–0.45 (64%)attempts 12–12goals 2–1
- Schmidt – Marino8:42
xG 0.24–0.19 (56%)attempts 5–6goals 0–1
- Cole – Simashev2:25
xG 0.05–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–2goals 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 TBL. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 72% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).