Sat, Jan 24, 2026·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
Utah Mammoth 5, Nashville Predators 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Utah Mammoth win this game 60% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 010 | 312 | 29 | 531 |
| NSH | 18 | 111 | 010 | 229 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:43NSHSteven StamkosPPAssists: Roman Josi · Slap, 0.05 xG0–1
- P2 3:00UTAClayton KellerAssists: Mikhail Sergachev, Sean Durzi · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–1
- P2 5:13UTAMichael CarconeAssists: Kailer Yamamoto · Wrist, 0.05 xG2–1
- P2 8:10UTAKailer YamamotoGWGAssists: Mikhail Sergachev, Sean Durzi · Tip-in, 0.09 xG3–1
- P2 16:39NSHJonathan MarchessaultAssists: Brady Skjei · Wrist, 0.08 xG3–2
- P3 11:02UTABarrett HaytonPPAssists: Dylan Guenther, Mikhail Sergachev · Wrist, 0.10 xG4–2
- P3 18:28UTAJJ PeterkaENAssists: Dylan Guenther, Barrett Hayton · Other, 0.79 xG5–2
Penalties (5)
- P1 3:08UTAKailer Yamamoto: Holding2 min · PPG
- P1 16:23NSHAdam Wilsby: Hooking2 min
- P3 4:58UTANick Schmaltz: Slashing2 min
- P3 10:00NSHRoman Josi: Holding the stick2 min · PPG
- P3 19:24UTANick DeSimone: Delaying game puck over glass2 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 20:00O'Reilly 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.
Utah Mammoth
Forward lines
- bestSchmaltz – Keller – Yamamoto12:20
xG 1.19–0.30 (80%)attempts 14–6goals 2–0
- Hayton – Peterka – But8:46
xG 0.39–0.31 (56%)attempts 9–8goals 0–1
- O'Brien – Stenlund – Tanev9:07
xG 0.31–0.72 (30%)attempts 7–14goals 0–0
- Carcone – McBain – Guenther10:01
xG 0.08–0.57 (12%)attempts 6–10goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestSergachev – Durzi15:35
xG 0.71–0.21 (77%)attempts 15–13goals 2–1
- Schmidt – Marino15:30
xG 1.13–0.99 (53%)attempts 16–13goals 0–0
- DeSimone – Durzi2:14
xG 0.24–0.15 (61%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestMarchessault – McCarron – Smith10:05
xG 0.57–0.46 (56%)attempts 11–10goals 0–0
- Stamkos – O'Reilly – Forsberg5:28
xG 0.34–0.23 (59%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Stamkos – Haula – Bunting5:22
xG 0.07–0.00 (96%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- O'Reilly – Forsberg – Evangelista4:45
xG 0.30–0.24 (55%)attempts 5–5goals 0–2
Defence pairs
- bestJosi – Skjei11:34
xG 1.03–0.41 (71%)attempts 12–5goals 0–1
- Perbix – Wilsby9:32
xG 0.60–0.19 (76%)attempts 12–3goals 0–0
- Perbix – Blankenburg2:51
xG 0.34–0.03 (92%)attempts 4–2goals 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.
NSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NSH 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 60% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).