Tue, Jan 13, 2026·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
Toronto Maple Leafs 1, Utah Mammoth 6
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Mammoth win this game 89% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TOR | 06 | 09 | 15 | 120 |
| UTA | 112 | 311 | 218 | 641 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:22UTAMichael CarconeAssists: Nate Schmidt, John Marino · Slap, 0.06 xG0–1
- P2 5:26UTADylan GuentherGWGAssists: Jack McBain, Ian Cole · Snap, 0.03 xG0–2
- P2 6:44UTADylan GuentherAssists: Jack McBain · Snap, 0.14 xG0–3
- P2 15:25UTAJJ PeterkaAssists: Daniil But, Ian Cole · Snap, 0.02 xG0–4
- P3 3:30TORCalle JarnkrokAssists: Oliver Ekman-Larsson · Snap, 0.08 xG1–4
- P3 13:29UTAJack McBainAssists: Dylan Guenther, Michael Carcone · Tip-in, 0.14 xG1–5
- P3 16:54UTADaniil ButAssists: Barrett Hayton, JJ Peterka · Snap, 0.24 xG1–6
Penalties (7)
- P1 6:51TORWilliam Nylander: Hooking2 min
- P1 7:37UTAJJ Peterka: Hooking2 min
- P1 13:13UTABarrett Hayton: Roughing2 min
- P1 13:13UTABarrett Hayton: Roughing2 min
- P1 13:13TOROliver Ekman-Larsson: Roughing2 min
- P1 15:30TORSimon Benoit: Tripping2 min
- P2 9:44UTAJack McBain: 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 20:00Tavares 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.
Toronto Maple Leafs
Forward lines
- bestDomi – Matthews – Maccelli5:57
xG 0.31–0.13 (71%)attempts 8–7goals 0–0
- Roy – Knies – Cowan3:36
xG 0.29–0.34 (46%)attempts 5–9goals 0–0
- Domi – Matthews – McMann7:04
xG 0.27–0.63 (30%)attempts 5–8goals 0–0
- Tavares – Nylander – Maccelli3:49
xG 0.16–0.65 (20%)attempts 2–10goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- Ekman-Larsson – Benoit4:09
xG 0.16–0.16 (50%)attempts 4–5goals 1–0
- Stecher – Benoit9:42
xG 0.29–0.63 (31%)attempts 6–16goals 0–2
- McCabe – Stecher2:41
xG 0.11–0.49 (18%)attempts 1–8goals 0–0
Utah Mammoth
Forward lines
- bestCarcone – McBain – Guenther11:40
xG 2.68–0.45 (86%)attempts 32–8goals 4–0
- Hayton – Peterka – But9:06
xG 0.85–0.14 (86%)attempts 14–9goals 2–0
- O'Brien – Stenlund – Tanev7:30
xG 0.81–0.40 (67%)attempts 16–10goals 0–1
- Schmaltz – Crouse – Keller11:10
xG 0.60–0.19 (76%)attempts 17–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSchmidt – Marino15:40
xG 2.26–0.34 (87%)attempts 30–6goals 3–0
- Sergachev – Durzi15:03
xG 2.19–0.32 (87%)attempts 29–12goals 1–0
- Cole – Sergachev2:22
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 2–2goals 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 TOR. 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 89% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − TOR), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).