Wed, Dec 3, 2025·Honda Center, Anaheim
Utah Mammoth 7, Anaheim Ducks 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Mammoth win this game 69% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 28 | 213 | 313 | 734 |
| ANA | 06 | 016 | 05 | 027 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 5:59UTALawson CrouseGWGAssists: Michael Carcone, Jack McBain · Backhand, 0.13 xG1–0
- P1 10:30UTADylan GuentherAssists: Ian Cole · Backhand, 0.13 xG2–0
- P2 5:43UTAIan ColeAssists: Maveric Lamoureux, JJ Peterka · Snap, 0.05 xG3–0
- P2 14:34UTAJJ PeterkaAssists: Nick Schmaltz, Clayton Keller · Snap, 0.05 xG4–0
- P3 1:41UTALiam O'BrienAssists: Jack McBain, Sean Durzi · Snap, 0.05 xG5–0
- P3 10:06UTAJJ PeterkaPPAssists: Dylan Guenther, Clayton Keller · Snap, 0.21 xG6–0
- P3 12:52UTAClayton KellerAssists: JJ Peterka, Nick Schmaltz · Snap, 0.05 xG7–0
Penalties (5)
- P1 7:30UTALogan Cooley: Tripping2 min
- P2 9:51UTAIan Cole: Interference2 min
- P2 18:36ANABeckett Sennecke: Cross checking2 min
- P3 4:35UTAMaveric Lamoureux: Tripping2 min
- P3 9:28ANARoss Johnston: Roughing2 min · PPG
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 20:00Carlsson 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
- bestSchmaltz – Keller – Peterka9:51
xG 1.05–0.34 (75%)attempts 19–7goals 3–0
- Crouse – Carcone – McBain11:04
xG 0.83–0.47 (64%)attempts 14–10goals 1–0
- Guenther – Cooley – But9:51
xG 0.66–0.33 (67%)attempts 15–10goals 1–0
- O'Brien – Stenlund – Yamamoto8:21
xG 0.12–0.10 (56%)attempts 5–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSchmidt – Durzi13:42
xG 1.24–0.62 (67%)attempts 23–11goals 0–0
- Marino – Sergachev12:09
xG 0.70–0.42 (63%)attempts 12–11goals 1–0
- Cole – Lamoureux15:00
xG 0.90–0.72 (56%)attempts 18–19goals 4–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- Kreider – Carlsson – Sennecke2:29
xG 0.01–0.05 (20%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
- Terry – McTavish – Gauthier2:00
xG 0.00–0.17 (0%)attempts 1–3goals 0–0
- Killorn – Vatrano – Poehling11:06
xG 0.48–0.75 (39%)attempts 15–13goals 0–1
- McTavish – Gauthier – Sennecke9:05
xG 0.74–1.02 (42%)attempts 11–18goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- Helleson – Zellweger2:02
xG 0.00–0.08 (0%)attempts 0–4goals 0–0
- Trouba – Mintyukov2:09
xG 0.29–0.40 (42%)attempts 6–4goals 0–1
- Gudas – Mintyukov5:35
xG 0.24–0.43 (36%)attempts 6–11goals 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, Utah Mammoth win this game 69% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).