Shutdown Assignment: Predators
Key matchup: Neutralize Dylan Guenther (28G, 1.02 xG/60, 3 HD goals)
Key matchup: Neutralize Dylan Guenther (28G, 1.02 xG/60, 3 HD goals)

Utah's 3–2 overtime victory over Nashville was a robbery: the Predators dominated the expected-goal battle 4.14–2.56, controlling 62% of shot quality at 5v5. Utah won because K. Vejmelka played the game of his life, not because the Mammoth outplayed Nashville.
The Predators dictated play with 50% of shot attempts (23–23) and 7 high-danger chances to Utah's 4. They should have won. Instead, they left 2.14 goals on the table—a haunting margin for a team that created quality looks all night but couldn't finish. This wasn't randomness; this was a systematic inability to convert.
Utah's goaltender made the difference. Vejmelka stopped 21 of 23 shots for a 0.913 save percentage, posting a +2.14 performance against expected, the kind of heroic outing that decides close games. J. Saros, by contrast, allowed 20 of 23 for a 0.870 mark—respectable but insufficient.
Utah earned their win through clinical execution in the moments that mattered. They converted 2 of 4 high-danger chances (50%) and scored 3 goals on 23 rush opportunities, prioritizing speed over volume. D. Guenther's backhander at 02:56 of overtime epitomized Utah's sharpshooting; he finished with 1 goal and 1 assist in 23:54. L. Cooley added 1 goal in 22:40, while F. Forsberg led Nashville's futile effort with 1 goal in 20:51.
Nashville crashed the net relentlessly, generating 6 rebound chances. They converted just one. That's the game: a Predators team that played better, worked harder, and still lost because Utah's goaltender was immovable and the Mammoth capitalized when it mattered.
Mammoth steal one from the Predators against the run of play
The Predators deserved better.
The board read UTA 3, NSH 2. The chances read UTA 2.6, NSH 4.1.
The Predators left 2.1 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.
The Mammoth buried 2 of 4 high-danger looks.
Mammoth steal one from the Predators against the run of play
A model, not a newsroom. Every number on these frames comes from the NHL's play-by-play and our own models. Nothing was watched, guessed or heard from anyone.
Read the full breakdownscore reads UTA–NSH
NSH went 0-for-16 from medium danger on 1.69 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.
UTA finished +0.4 against expected, NSH -2.1.
Wrist shots carried the volume: UTA went 2-for-17, NSH 0-for-21. UTA scored 3 of theirs off the rush.
Two things happened in this game: who created the better chances, and who put the puck in the net. They are not the same thing, and this page separates them on purpose.
The one to watch is expected goals— the best single read on who deserved to win. When it disagrees with the scoreboard, that disagreement is usually the story. Nothing here is a projection; every figure is computed from this game's play-by-play. Full glossary →
A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5
A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5
Each club shoots toward its own end — UTA left, NSH right — the way you would watch it. A dot's size is how dangerous the look was, from distance and angle; it is a proxy for shot quality, not the xG model the article is written from. Hover a dot for the shooter and the clock.
The model projects a UTA 3.2 - 3.2 NSH game with the Mammoth at 50% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.
Keys to the game
| Metric | UTA | NSH |
|---|---|---|
| xG% | 51.5% | 48.7% |
| Corsi% | 52.9% | 49.5% |
| PDO | 1.003 | 0.992 |
Rates from 2025-26 — the 2026-27 sample isn't live yet.
UTA
NSH
UTA
NSH
Data: NHL API, Backcheck xG model
UTA by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score UTA 3.2–3.2 NSH; 16% chance it's tied after 60.
UTA holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.003 vs 0.992) says UTA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.
Key matchup: Neutralize Dylan Guenther (28G, 1.02 xG/60, 3 HD goals)
Key matchup: Neutralize Dylan Guenther (28G, 1.02 xG/60, 3 HD goals)
Key matchup: Neutralize Zachary L'Heureux (4G, 0.85 xG/60, 1 HD goals)
Key matchup: Neutralize Zachary L'Heureux (4G, 0.85 xG/60, 1 HD goals)
Maveric Lamoureux is on ice for 2.98 xGA/60 and 4 high-danger shots against this season.
Hunt matchups against Maveric Lamoureux's shifts with the top line.
Jonathan Marchessault is on ice for 3.07 xGA/60 and 40 high-danger shots against this season.
Hunt matchups against Jonathan Marchessault's shifts with the top line.