Fri, Mar 20, 2026·Delta Center, Salt Lake City
Anaheim Ducks 4, Utah Mammoth 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 55% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 15 | 19 | 210 | 424 |
| UTA | 114 | 09 | 07 | 130 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 1:48UTADylan GuentherAssists: Sean Durzi, JJ Peterka · Slap, 0.06 xG0–1
- P1 13:37ANARyan PoehlingSHAssists: Alex Killorn, Pavel Mintyukov · Wrist, 0.20 xG1–1
- P2 9:09ANAAlex KillornGWGAssists: Beckett Sennecke · Snap, 0.13 xG2–1
- P3 18:24ANACutter GauthierENAssists: Jeffrey Viel, John Carlson · Snap, 0.69 xG3–1
- P3 19:05ANAMikael GranlundENAssists: Ryan Poehling, Alex Killorn · Wrist, 0.71 xG4–1
Penalties (13)
- P1 6:40ANAIan Moore: Slashing2 min
- P1 13:20ANAChris Kreider: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P1 19:26UTAMikhail Sergachev: Slashing2 min
- P2 3:15UTAJack McBain: Fighting5 min
- P2 3:15ANAJeffrey Viel: Fighting5 min
- P2 7:00UTAJohn Marino: Tripping2 min
- P2 15:40UTAIan Cole: Hooking2 min
- P3 4:48UTAClayton Keller: Slashing2 min
- P3 14:32ANAJacob Trouba: Tripping2 min
- P3 19:12UTABarrett Hayton: High sticking2 min
- P3 19:12UTANate Schmidt: Roughing2 min
- P3 19:12ANATim Washe: Roughing2 min
- P3 19:12ANAJansen Harkins: 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 20:00Poehling won the faceoff against Hayton
- 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.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- Harkins – McTavish – Washe2:47
xG 0.09–0.05 (65%)attempts 5–4goals 0–0
- Killorn – Granlund – Sennecke5:44
xG 0.37–0.47 (44%)attempts 8–7goals 0–0
- Granlund – Harkins – Washe2:26
xG 0.01–0.18 (7%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- Kreider – Terry – Carlsson8:54
xG 0.12–0.43 (22%)attempts 5–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMoore – Zellweger8:36
xG 0.34–0.25 (57%)attempts 9–5goals 0–1
- Carlson – Mintyukov14:10
xG 0.37–0.54 (41%)attempts 12–12goals 0–0
- Trouba – Mintyukov2:42
xG 0.06–0.25 (19%)attempts 3–8goals 0–0
Utah Mammoth
Forward lines
- bestPeterka – Guenther – Cooley6:11
xG 0.53–0.16 (76%)attempts 9–9goals 1–0
- Crouse – Keller – Cooley3:26
xG 0.33–0.00 (100%)attempts 10–2goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Crouse – Keller9:51
xG 0.56–0.28 (67%)attempts 11–8goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Peterka – Guenther2:23
xG 0.24–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–0goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSchmidt – Marino13:40
xG 1.21–0.02 (98%)attempts 28–4goals 0–0
- Cole – Durzi10:13
xG 0.59–0.47 (56%)attempts 10–13goals 1–0
- Weegar – Durzi2:28
xG 0.00–0.07 (0%)attempts 0–4goals 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 ANA. 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 55% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (UTA − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).