Fri, Dec 19, 2025·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
New Jersey Devils 2, Utah Mammoth 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Mammoth win this game 66% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NJD | 09 | 16 | 17 | 222 |
| UTA | 17 | 018 | 08 | 133 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 9:35UTADaniil ButPPAssists: Sean Durzi · Backhand, 0.12 xG0–1
- P2 11:21NJDConnor BrownAssists: Nico Hischier · Snap, 0.13 xG1–1
- P3 4:20NJDStefan NoesenPPGWGAssists: Nico Hischier, Luke Hughes · Wrist, 0.16 xG2–1
Penalties (9)
- P1 8:10NJDDougie Hamilton: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P1 11:00UTADaniil But: Tripping2 min
- P1 12:03UTANate Schmidt: Cross checking2 min
- P2 1:16UTABarrett Hayton: High sticking2 min
- P2 4:35NJDAngus Crookshank: Roughing2 min
- P2 7:58UTALawson Crouse: High sticking2 min
- P2 19:26NJDBrenden Dillon: Hooking2 min
- P3 3:11UTAMikhail Sergachev: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P3 18:39NJDDawson Mercer: Tripping2 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 20:00Glass won the faceoff against Schmaltz
- 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.
New Jersey Devils
Forward lines
- Palat – Brown – Glass10:18
xG 0.08–0.19 (29%)attempts 5–11goals 0–0
- Bratt – Hischier – Mercer10:39
xG 0.38–0.68 (36%)attempts 14–7goals 0–0
- Glendening – Crookshank – Parent3:57
xG 0.03–0.34 (7%)attempts 2–10goals 0–0
- Noesen – Lammikko – Cotter7:09
xG 0.02–0.38 (5%)attempts 3–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHamilton – Siegenthaler11:33
xG 0.43–0.32 (57%)attempts 14–10goals 1–0
- Dillon – White9:48
xG 0.05–0.14 (26%)attempts 4–8goals 0–0
- Pesce – Siegenthaler2:51
xG 0.02–0.29 (8%)attempts 1–7goals 0–0
Utah Mammoth
Forward lines
- bestSchmaltz – Keller – Peterka10:51
xG 0.52–0.19 (73%)attempts 13–9goals 0–0
- Crouse – Hayton – Guenther7:34
xG 0.43–0.17 (72%)attempts 8–8goals 0–0
- Kerfoot – O'Brien – Stenlund5:06
xG 0.22–0.00 (100%)attempts 7–2goals 0–0
- Carcone – McBain – But8:54
xG 0.30–0.14 (68%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSergachev – Durzi13:07
xG 0.99–0.43 (69%)attempts 17–10goals 0–1
- Cole – DeSimone9:14
xG 0.53–0.03 (95%)attempts 12–6goals 0–0
- DeSimone – Durzi2:01
xG 0.31–0.02 (94%)attempts 7–1goals 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 NJD. 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 66% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − NJD), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).