Sun, Dec 21, 2025·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
Winnipeg Jets 3, Utah Mammoth 4 (OT)
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Mammoth win this game 71% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WPG | 05 | 18 | 213 | 00 | 326 |
| UTA | 27 | 18 | 06 | 11 | 422 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 5:20UTALawson CrouseAssists: Dylan Guenther, Barrett Hayton · Slap, 0.08 xG0–1
- P1 9:31UTAJJ PeterkaAssists: Clayton Keller, Nick Schmaltz · Tip-in, 0.10 xG0–2
- P2 3:01UTAAlexander KerfootAssists: Sean Durzi, Mikhail Sergachev · Slap, 0.19 xG0–3
- P2 11:18WPGKyle ConnorPPAssists: Mark Scheifele, Gabriel Vilardi · Slap, 0.07 xG1–3
- P3 15:23WPGKyle ConnorAssists: Josh Morrissey, Mark Scheifele · Slap, 0.03 xG2–3
- P3 15:48WPGMorgan BarronAssists: Tanner Pearson · Snap, 0.17 xG3–3
- OT 0:13UTAClayton KellerGWGAssists: Dylan Guenther, Mikhail Sergachev · Snap, 0.11 xG3–4
Penalties (6)
- P1 0:45WPGNeal Pionk: Tripping2 min
- P1 11:33UTANick DeSimone: Interference2 min
- P1 17:50UTAJJ Peterka: Hooking2 min
- P2 10:27UTALiam O'Brien: Interference2 min · PPG
- P2 17:05WPGTanner Pearson: Interference2 min
- P3 8:01WPGTanner Pearson: Holding2 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 20:00Scheifele won the faceoff against Hayton
- 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.
Winnipeg Jets
Forward lines
- bestScheifele – Connor – Iafallo5:00
xG 0.18–0.03 (84%)attempts 7–4goals 0–0
- Lowry – Pearson – Barron6:47
xG 0.36–0.21 (63%)attempts 10–3goals 1–0
- Scheifele – Connor – Vilardi6:55
xG 0.18–0.17 (52%)attempts 12–2goals 1–0
- Toews – Niederreiter – Pearson3:16
xG 0.00–0.07 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSamberg – Pionk10:19
xG 0.34–0.13 (72%)attempts 12–5goals 0–0
- DeMelo – Morrissey12:58
xG 0.34–0.17 (67%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
- DeMelo – Samberg2:40
xG 0.17–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–0goals 1–0
Utah Mammoth
Forward lines
- bestCrouse – Hayton – Guenther6:54
xG 0.54–0.01 (98%)attempts 9–5goals 1–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Peterka9:59
xG 0.34–0.21 (62%)attempts 11–7goals 1–0
- Carcone – McBain – But8:01
xG 0.29–0.25 (54%)attempts 7–6goals 0–0
- Kerfoot – O'Brien – Stenlund8:48
xG 0.31–0.40 (44%)attempts 4–14goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestCole – DeSimone11:02
xG 0.67–0.24 (74%)attempts 13–9goals 1–0
- Sergachev – Durzi14:52
xG 0.59–0.19 (75%)attempts 9–20goals 1–1
- Schmidt – Marino13:45
xG 0.30–0.20 (60%)attempts 6–9goals 1–0
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 WPG. 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 71% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − WPG), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).