Mon, Nov 17, 2025·Honda Center, Anaheim
Utah Mammoth 2, Anaheim Ducks 3 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 65% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 06 | 17 | 15 | 00 | 218 |
| ANA | 15 | 09 | 111 | 11 | 326 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 15:52ANAJackson LaCombeAssists: Ryan Strome, Alex Killorn · Wrist, 0.12 xG0–1
- P2 18:14UTADylan GuentherAssists: Nate Schmidt, John Marino · Slap, 0.06 xG1–1
- P3 9:19UTALogan CooleyAssists: Mikhail Sergachev, Nick Schmaltz · Slap, 0.06 xG2–1
- P3 19:55ANATroy TerryAssists: Chris Kreider, Cutter Gauthier · Backhand, 0.17 xG2–2
- OT 1:50ANAOlen ZellwegerGWGAssists: Beckett Sennecke, Alex Killorn · Wrist, 0.21 xG2–3
Penalties (6)
- P1 3:02ANATroy Terry: Hooking2 min
- P1 3:02UTAMikhail Sergachev: Embellishment2 min
- P1 10:05ANABeckett Sennecke: Tripping2 min
- P1 15:53UTALiam O'Brien: Fighting5 min
- P1 15:53ANARoss Johnston: Fighting5 min
- P2 4:29UTALawson Crouse: 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 20:00McBain won the faceoff against Carlsson
- 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 – Cooley13:25
xG 0.71–0.25 (74%)attempts 14–5goals 1–0
- Carcone – Hayton – Guenther9:07
xG 0.30–0.18 (62%)attempts 12–7goals 1–0
- O'Brien – Stenlund – Tanev7:41
xG 0.07–0.04 (65%)attempts 4–7goals 0–0
- Crouse – McBain – Peterka11:33
xG 0.02–0.68 (2%)attempts 2–15goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMarino – Simashev2:20
xG 0.17–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–0goals 0–0
- Sergachev – DeSimone6:17
xG 0.40–0.24 (63%)attempts 7–5goals 1–0
- Schmidt – Marino15:12
xG 0.33–0.21 (62%)attempts 12–7goals 1–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestHarkins – Gauthier – Sennecke3:00
xG 0.17–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Killorn – Strome – Vatrano8:56
xG 0.40–0.30 (58%)attempts 12–8goals 1–0
- Johnston – Harkins – Nesterenko4:40
xG 0.10–0.06 (60%)attempts 9–1goals 0–1
- McTavish – Gauthier – Sennecke8:07
xG 0.01–0.19 (5%)attempts 2–10goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Trouba – LaCombe2:07
xG 0.04–0.00 (100%)attempts 1–0goals 0–0
- Helleson – LaCombe15:58
xG 0.48–0.55 (46%)attempts 13–14goals 0–1
- Trouba – Zellweger18:25
xG 0.48–0.62 (44%)attempts 14–14goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 65% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).