Sun, Apr 12, 2026·Scotiabank Saddledome, Calgary
Utah Mammoth 1, Calgary Flames 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Calgary Flames win this game 69% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTA | 04 | 011 | 114 | 129 |
| CGY | 214 | 03 | 26 | 423 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 7:06CGYMatt CoronatoAssists: Morgan Frost, Brayden Pachal · Wrap-around, 0.07 xG0–1
- P1 8:27CGYConnor ZaryGWGAssists: Zayne Parekh, Zach Whitecloud · Deflected, 0.14 xG0–2
- P3 6:01CGYMikael BacklundAssists: Blake Coleman, Brayden Pachal · Poke, 0.18 xG0–3
- P3 9:10CGYBrayden PachalAssists: Aydar Suniev, Olli Maatta · Slap, 0.03 xG0–4
- P3 11:20UTALawson CrouseAssists: Clayton Keller, MacKenzie Weegar · Wrist, 0.03 xG1–4
Penalties (7)
- P1 1:25CGYAdam Klapka: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P1 12:53UTAClayton Keller: Slashing2 min
- P1 18:08UTAClayton Keller: Hooking2 min
- P2 1:10CGYMatt Coronato: Tripping2 min
- P2 15:41CGYAdam Klapka: Holding2 min
- P3 6:01UTAKailer Yamamoto: Delaying game unsuccessful challenge2 min
- P3 13:10UTAMichael Carcone: Too many men on the ice2 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 20:00Schmaltz won the faceoff against Backlund
- 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
- bestO'Brien – Stenlund – Tanev7:44
xG 0.46–0.29 (61%)attempts 13–6goals 0–0
- Schmaltz – Crouse – Keller11:12
xG 0.27–0.45 (37%)attempts 11–6goals 1–1
- Kerfoot – Carcone – Peterka9:12
xG 0.22–0.50 (31%)attempts 11–8goals 0–0
- Yamamoto – Guenther – Cooley7:38
xG 0.18–0.61 (23%)attempts 7–12goals 0–2
Defence pairs
- bestCole – Durzi10:51
xG 0.55–0.36 (60%)attempts 18–4goals 0–2
- Schmidt – Durzi2:17
xG 0.17–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Weegar – Sergachev10:50
xG 0.14–0.25 (36%)attempts 10–7goals 0–0
Calgary Flames
Forward lines
- bestOlofsson – Frost – Coronato9:04
xG 0.69–0.35 (66%)attempts 12–9goals 0–0
- Backlund – Coleman – Farabee11:34
xG 0.55–0.36 (60%)attempts 7–16goals 1–1
- Strome – Zary – Klapka7:41
xG 0.34–0.25 (58%)attempts 6–10goals 1–0
- Sharangovich – Suniev – Gross5:24
xG 0.04–0.13 (25%)attempts 3–2goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestMaatta – Brzustewicz12:05
xG 0.41–0.13 (76%)attempts 5–10goals 1–0
- Whitecloud – Parekh14:36
xG 0.95–0.75 (56%)attempts 19–19goals 1–0
- Pachal – Wiebe4:28
xG 0.19–0.06 (78%)attempts 3–5goals 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.
CGY's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CGY 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, Calgary Flames win this game 69% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CGY − UTA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).