Tue, Mar 3, 2026·Capital One Arena, Washington
Utah Mammoth 3, Washington Capitals 2
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 29 | 18 | 06 | 323 |
| WSH | 16 | 07 | 112 | 225 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 11:12UTADylan GuentherAssists: Clayton Keller, Nick Schmaltz · Snap, 0.07 xG1–0
- P1 13:23UTAMikhail SergachevPPAssists: Clayton Keller, Dylan Guenther · Snap, 0.06 xG2–0
- P1 19:27WSHPierre-Luc DuboisPPAssists: Rasmus Sandin · Snap, 0.05 xG2–1
- P2 18:24UTAJJ PeterkaPPGWGAssists: Logan Cooley, Sean Durzi · Snap, 0.18 xG3–1
- P3 6:31WSHRyan LeonardPPAssists: Dylan Strome, Jakob Chychrun · Snap, 0.08 xG3–2
Penalties (4)
- P1 12:29WSHAlex Ovechkin: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P1 17:28UTAAlexander Kerfoot: Holding the stick2 min · PPG
- P2 16:44WSHJakob Chychrun: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P3 6:02UTAJack McBain: Hooking2 min · PPG
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 20:00Dubois 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. Shift data for this game is incomplete, so treat these as rough.
Utah Mammoth
Forward lines
- bestCrouse – Peterka – Cooley10:44
xG 0.79–0.11 (88%)attempts 17–5goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Guenther12:43
xG 1.01–1.03 (49%)attempts 21–16goals 1–0
- Kerfoot – Stenlund – Carcone8:41
xG 0.21–0.40 (35%)attempts 11–8goals 0–0
- Yamamoto – Hayton – McBain9:25
xG 0.11–0.46 (20%)attempts 10–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCole – Maatta11:10
xG 0.58–0.24 (71%)attempts 10–5goals 0–0
- Cole – Durzi3:08
xG 0.21–0.23 (47%)attempts 4–4goals 0–0
- Sergachev – Durzi12:55
xG 1.00–1.05 (49%)attempts 23–15goals 1–0
Washington Capitals
Forward lines
- bestOvechkin – Strome – Beauvillier6:33
xG 0.21–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–7goals 0–0
- Sourdif – Lapierre – Leonard4:08
xG 0.08–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Wilson – Dubois – McMichael10:44
xG 0.70–0.74 (49%)attempts 12–19goals 0–0
- Dowd – Duhaime – Frank5:32
xG 0.07–0.39 (15%)attempts 2–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestRoy – Sandin3:16
xG 0.24–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Roy – Chychrun12:34
xG 0.98–0.83 (54%)attempts 14–15goals 0–1
- McIlrath – van Riemsdyk6:14
xG 0.20–0.24 (47%)attempts 4–11goals 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.
WSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line WSH 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 66% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (WSH − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).