Mon, Mar 9, 2026·United Center, Chicago
Utah Mammoth 2, Chicago Blackhawks 3 (OT)
Three stars
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 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 26 | 09 | 08 | 02 | 225 |
| CHI | 18 | 111 | 06 | 11 | 326 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 9:43UTABarrett HaytonAssists: Nick DeSimone, Ian Cole · Tip-in, 0.07 xG1–0
- P1 13:46CHIAndrew MangiapaneAssists: Ryan Donato, Ilya Mikheyev · Deflected, 0.21 xG1–1
- P1 16:26UTADylan GuentherAssists: Clayton Keller, Nick Schmaltz · Wrist, 0.14 xG2–1
- P2 15:35CHIAndre BurakovskyAssists: Connor Bedard, Ryan Greene · Cradle, 0.00 xG2–2
- OT 2:36CHIFrank NazarPPGWGAssists: Teuvo Teravainen, Connor Bedard · Wrist, 0.08 xG2–3
Penalties (6)
- P1 5:38UTABarrett Hayton: Holding2 min
- P2 1:16UTALogan Cooley: Holding2 min
- P2 2:03CHIConnor Bedard: Hooking2 min
- P2 4:24UTASean Durzi: Cross checking2 min
- P3 1:02CHIRyan Greene: Holding2 min
- OT 1:56UTANick Schmaltz: Tripping2 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 20:00Donato 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
- bestKerfoot – Stenlund – Carcone6:50
xG 0.44–0.16 (73%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
- Crouse – Peterka – Cooley9:03
xG 0.25–0.16 (61%)attempts 8–4goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Keller – Guenther14:44
xG 0.61–0.77 (44%)attempts 12–16goals 1–1
- Yamamoto – Hayton – McBain9:45
xG 0.23–0.40 (37%)attempts 10–8goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestSchmidt – Marino15:35
xG 0.63–0.48 (57%)attempts 10–11goals 1–0
- Weegar – Durzi13:53
xG 0.47–0.72 (39%)attempts 17–12goals 0–1
- Cole – DeSimone11:24
xG 0.26–0.56 (32%)attempts 5–15goals 1–0
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestBurakovsky – Greene – Bedard13:36
xG 0.70–0.15 (82%)attempts 13–12goals 1–0
- Donato – Mangiapane – Mikheyev11:44
xG 0.53–0.62 (46%)attempts 11–10goals 1–1
- Lafferty – Slaggert – Lardis4:43
xG 0.14–0.28 (34%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
- Teravainen – Bertuzzi – Nazar10:27
xG 0.30–0.66 (31%)attempts 7–10goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestVlasic – Crevier14:08
xG 1.06–0.59 (64%)attempts 17–11goals 1–1
- Grzelcyk – Levshunov12:32
xG 0.59–0.66 (47%)attempts 12–11goals 0–1
- Kaiser – Rinzel16:32
xG 0.36–0.68 (35%)attempts 11–18goals 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.
CHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CHI 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, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 54% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).