Sun, Nov 9, 2025·Canadian Tire Centre, Ottawa
Utah Mammoth 2, Ottawa Senators 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Mammoth win this game 62% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 114 | 19 | 08 | 231 |
| OTT | 15 | 29 | 111 | 425 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 13:59OTTRidly GreigAssists: Dylan Cozens · Wrist, 0.17 xG0–1
- P1 17:33UTAClayton KellerAssists: Mikhail Sergachev, Vitek Vanecek · Wrist, 0.25 xG1–1
- P2 7:13OTTJordan SpenceAssists: David Perron · Slap, 0.11 xG1–2
- P2 15:52OTTNick CousinsGWGAssists: Dylan Cozens, Ridly Greig · Wrap-around, 0.07 xG1–3
- P2 18:56UTANick SchmaltzAssists: Logan Cooley, Nick DeSimone · Backhand, 0.15 xG2–3
- P3 3:46OTTMichael AmadioAssists: Thomas Chabot, Jordan Spence · Tip-in, 0.13 xG2–4
Penalties (5)
- P1 8:22UTAJJ Peterka: Interference2 min
- P1 8:22OTTNick Cousins: Roughing2 min
- P1 15:31OTTShane Pinto: Holding2 min
- P2 1:46UTABarrett Hayton: Roughing2 min
- P3 13:54UTAMichael Carcone: 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 20:00Cozens won the faceoff against McBain
- 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
- bestHayton – Peterka – Guenther10:56
xG 0.82–0.51 (61%)attempts 8–8goals 0–0
- Stenlund – Tanev – Yamamoto7:24
xG 0.34–0.15 (69%)attempts 11–4goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Cooley13:21
xG 0.56–0.40 (59%)attempts 10–12goals 2–0
- Crouse – Carcone – McBain7:44
xG 0.52–0.55 (48%)attempts 12–8goals 0–2
Defence pairs
- bestSchmidt – Marino15:00
xG 1.01–0.70 (59%)attempts 20–13goals 0–2
- Cole – DeSimone9:33
xG 0.25–0.28 (47%)attempts 7–10goals 1–1
- Sergachev – Simashev13:55
xG 0.54–0.88 (38%)attempts 9–12goals 0–1
Ottawa Senators
Forward lines
- bestGiroux – Amadio – Pinto11:26
xG 0.48–0.09 (84%)attempts 9–6goals 1–0
- Perron – Batherson – Stützle10:02
xG 0.31–0.19 (62%)attempts 10–8goals 1–0
- Zetterlund – Cozens – Greig7:56
xG 0.51–0.53 (49%)attempts 8–6goals 1–0
- Eller – Cousins – Hodgson3:52
xG 0.00–0.31 (0%)attempts 1–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSanderson – Zub14:48
xG 0.88–0.50 (64%)attempts 14–9goals 1–1
- Chabot – Spence10:27
xG 0.42–0.15 (73%)attempts 11–8goals 2–0
- Spence – Kleven7:30
xG 0.22–0.28 (44%)attempts 6–8goals 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.
OTT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line OTT 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 62% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (OTT − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).