Sun, Mar 1, 2026·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
Chicago Blackhawks 4, Utah Mammoth 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 54% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | 113 | 29 | 16 | 428 |
| UTA | 08 | 010 | 04 | 022 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 19:05CHITeuvo TeravainenPPGWGAssists: Tyler Bertuzzi · Snap, 0.18 xG1–0
- P2 11:38CHINick FolignoUnassisted · Backhand, 0.17 xG2–0
- P2 13:07CHILandon SlaggertAssists: Oliver Moore, Artyom Levshunov · Snap, 0.07 xG3–0
- P3 1:25CHITeuvo TeravainenSHAssists: Alex Vlasic, Connor Murphy · Snap, 0.13 xG4–0
Penalties (8)
- P1 5:48UTAIan Cole: Kneeing2 min
- P1 11:17UTAClayton Keller: Embellishment2 min
- P1 11:17CHITyler Bertuzzi: Hooking2 min
- P1 11:41UTALawson Crouse: Tripping2 min
- P1 18:22UTANate Schmidt: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P1 19:52CHINick Foligno: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P3 1:08CHILouis Crevier: Tripping2 min
- P3 19:02UTASean Durzi: Misconduct10 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 20:00Kerfoot won the faceoff against Dickinson
- 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.
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestFoligno – Slaggert – Moore5:46
xG 0.24–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–1goals 2–0
- Dickinson – Bertuzzi – Mikheyev10:47
xG 0.32–0.11 (74%)attempts 6–6goals 0–0
- Burakovsky – Greene – Bedard11:12
xG 0.56–0.79 (41%)attempts 9–15goals 0–0
- Teravainen – Donato – Nazar8:37
xG 0.15–0.44 (25%)attempts 14–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMurphy – Korchinski8:38
xG 0.32–0.11 (75%)attempts 7–3goals 1–0
- Grzelcyk – Levshunov10:15
xG 0.47–0.37 (56%)attempts 14–13goals 1–0
- Vlasic – Levshunov3:00
xG 0.11–0.15 (42%)attempts 1–2goals 0–0
Utah Mammoth
Forward lines
- bestYamamoto – Peterka – Cooley4:46
xG 0.45–0.08 (85%)attempts 8–2goals 0–0
- Yamamoto – Hayton – Peterka7:01
xG 0.37–0.05 (88%)attempts 6–5goals 0–0
- Crouse – Carcone – McBain2:13
xG 0.10–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–0goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Guenther5:00
xG 0.18–0.15 (54%)attempts 4–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSchmidt – Marino15:04
xG 0.76–0.25 (75%)attempts 12–10goals 0–1
- Cole – Maatta12:29
xG 0.54–0.33 (62%)attempts 11–4goals 0–1
- Sergachev – Durzi17:03
xG 0.61–0.70 (47%)attempts 15–17goals 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 CHI. 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, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 54% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − CHI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).