Sun, Dec 14, 2025·PPG Paints Arena, Pittsburgh
Utah Mammoth 5, Pittsburgh Penguins 4 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Mammoth win this game 86% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 07 | 011 | 417 | 11 | 536 |
| PIT | 26 | 14 | 16 | 00 | 416 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 0:48PITJustin BrazeauAssists: Ben Kindel, Rutger McGroarty · Backhand, 0.08 xG0–1
- P1 15:21PITBryan RustAssists: Rickard Rakell · Backhand, 0.09 xG0–2
- P2 5:40PITBen KindelAssists: Ryan Shea, Kris Letang · Wrist, 0.15 xG0–3
- P3 1:07UTANate SchmidtAssists: Nick Schmaltz, JJ Peterka · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–3
- P3 1:22UTAMichael CarconeUnassisted · Wrist, 0.04 xG2–3
- P3 5:35UTASean DurziAssists: Kailer Yamamoto, Mikhail Sergachev · Wrist, 0.49 xG3–3
- P3 7:06UTAMichael CarconePPAssists: Barrett Hayton, Daniil But · Wrist, 0.06 xG4–3
- P3 14:06PITJustin BrazeauAssists: Erik Karlsson, Ben Kindel · Tip-in, 0.08 xG4–4
- OT 0:42UTADylan GuentherGWGAssists: John Marino · Wrist, 0.10 xG5–4
Penalties (7)
- P1 4:30PITBen Kindel: Hooking2 min
- P1 9:18UTANate Schmidt: Tripping2 min
- P1 16:33UTAIan Cole: Roughing2 min
- P2 9:04PITVille Koivunen: Hooking2 min
- P2 14:11PITConnor Clifton: Interference2 min
- P3 5:35PITVille Koivunen: Delaying game unsuccessful challenge2 min · PPG
- P3 10:52PITBryan Rust: 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 20:00Hayton won the faceoff against Crosby
- 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 – Peterka13:02
xG 0.78–0.29 (73%)attempts 19–7goals 1–1
- O'Brien – Stenlund – Yamamoto5:37
xG 0.52–0.14 (79%)attempts 6–2goals 1–0
- Crouse – Hayton – Guenther7:38
xG 0.36–0.20 (64%)attempts 10–6goals 0–1
- Carcone – McBain – But6:14
xG 0.16–0.15 (51%)attempts 8–2goals 1–1
Defence pairs
- bestSchmidt – Marino13:47
xG 0.72–0.28 (72%)attempts 20–8goals 1–0
- Sergachev – Durzi8:54
xG 0.64–0.27 (70%)attempts 12–6goals 1–2
- Cole – Schmidt2:11
xG 0.01–0.00 (100%)attempts 1–0goals 0–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestMantha – Novak – Koivunen8:08
xG 0.32–0.24 (57%)attempts 5–11goals 0–0
- Crosby – Rust – Rakell13:15
xG 0.26–0.32 (45%)attempts 8–15goals 1–0
- Brazeau – McGroarty – Kindel10:56
xG 0.34–0.50 (41%)attempts 7–12goals 2–1
- Hayes – Acciari – Dewar4:45
xG 0.06–0.65 (8%)attempts 5–9goals 0–2
Defence pairs
- Karlsson – Wotherspoon16:24
xG 0.35–0.41 (46%)attempts 11–13goals 2–0
- Letang – Shea11:54
xG 0.45–0.65 (41%)attempts 6–21goals 2–1
- Clifton – Graves12:30
xG 0.23–0.79 (22%)attempts 6–17goals 0–2
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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT 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 86% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).