Backcheck
Recap · UTA at ANA

Ducks edge the Mammoth in overtime

The Ducks earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.

By the ModelJul 11, 4:30 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
UTA
Utah Mammoth
2
Home
ANA
Anaheim Ducks
3
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

1.96Expected goals2.72
58% share for the better side
18Shot attempts (SOG)26
3High-danger chances2
44Corsi (all attempts)59
Score-adjusted: 44% / 56%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Anaheim won 3-2 despite Utah's high-danger chance edge (3-2). The Ducks' shot volume and quality—59% of attempts and 2.72 expected goals to 1.96—overcame the deficit. Olen Zellweger's wrist shot from the doorstep at 01:50 OT settled it.

The goaltending proved nearly identical. L. Dostal made 16 saves on 18 shots for a 0.889 save percentage. K. Vejmelka stopped 23 of 26, posting 0.885—neither goalie was the deciding factor.

Utah scored twice from low-danger spots, the sort of leakage that decides close games. Anaheim was lethal on the rush, converting 2 of 23 chances. Utah matched that: 2 goals on 22 rush attempts. Anaheim also crashed the net effectively, generating 3 rebounds and scoring on 1.

Anaheim's win rested on sustained control, not high-danger luck. Their 58–42 expected-goals split translated to dominance that one overtime period cannot erase.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
UTA0 / 3 · 0.63 xG
ANA1 / 2 · 0.42 xG
Medium dangermid-range
UTA0 / 6 · 0.73 xG
ANA2 / 15 · 1.51 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
UTA2 / 35 · 0.59 xG
ANA0 / 42 · 0.79 xG

UTA went 2-for-35 from low danger on 0.59 expected goals — 1.4 above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play
The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
UTA
2 G · 1.96 xG · +0.0
ANA
3 G · 2.72 xG · +0.3
01234
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
K. VejmelkaUTA
-0.3
L. DostalANA
-0.0

UTA finished +0.0 against expected, ANA +0.3 — K. Vejmelka (UTA) allowed 0.3 more goals than expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
UTA
WRIST0/8
SLAP2/8
SNAP0/5
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/4
DEFLECTED0/1
POKE0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/13
ANA
WRIST2/17
SLAP0/9
SNAP0/10
TIP IN0/5
BACKHAND1/1
DEFLECTED0/0
POKE0/0
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/16
UTA
ANA
Off the rush
2 G on 22 · 1.60 xG
2 G on 23 · 1.74 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 1 · 0.09 xG
1 G on 3 · 0.29 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: UTA went 0-for-8, ANA 2-for-17. UTA scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
A. Killorn
#17 · L · ANA
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 14:48 TOI · +2
J. LaCombe
#2 · D · ANA
1 G · 0 A · 5 SOG · 25:29 TOI · +1
M. Sergachev
#98 · D · UTA
0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 24:18 TOI · -2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • UTA scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • ANA was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 23 rush chances.
  • UTA was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 22 rush chances.
  • ANA created 3 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · UTA at ANA · 10:00 PM ET

Mammoth at Ducks: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 4:44 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

52%
ANA
Model favorite
48%
52%
UTA50ANA

ANA by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score UTA 2.62.7 ANA; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

UTA← edge
edge →ANA
52.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
53.0%Corsi%52.0%
2.64xGF / 602.80
2.39xGA / 602.59
2.26Goals for / gm2.09
1.99Goals against / gm2.32
1.003PDO — luck, not skill0.981

UTA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.003 vs 0.981) says UTA has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects 2.6 to 2.7 goals per team, with the Ducks at 52% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Recent form favors Anaheim. The Ducks are 7-3-0 over their last 10 games. Utah, by contrast, sits at -5 goal differential over the same stretch, an underwater position that suggests deeper structural issues than a cold streak.

The five-on-five metrics largely justify the tight projection. Both teams generate identical expected-goal percentages at 52.0%. Utah leads marginally in shot-attempt rate (Corsi% of 53.0% versus Anaheim's 52.0%), a small advantage that hasn't translated to consistent results. What separates them is luck. Utah's PDO sits at 1.003—they're running about as hot as luck will allow. Anaheim's is 0.981, meaning the Ducks are running cold and ripe for positive regression.

Utah's offence centres on Dylan Guenther, who generates 1.02 expected goals per 60 minutes with 28 goals, 15 assists, and a 16.8% shooting rate backed by 3 high-danger goals. Daniil But supports the attack at 1.01 xG/60 with 2 goals and 2 assists, though his 5.6% shooting rate signals regression potential. Anaheim counters with Beckett Sennecke at 1.03 xG/60, 20 goals, 19 assists, 8 high-danger goals, and a 13.5% shooting rate. Cutter Gauthier offers 0.99 xG/60 across 25 goals and 16 assists at a 12.9% clip, with 2 high-danger goals. Both Ducks forwards generate quality chances with regularity; the question is whether Anaheim's shooters will finish at sustainable rates.

Maveric Lamoureux represents Utah's defensive liability, while Mason McTavish fills that role for Anaheim. Neither team has a clear structural advantage in limiting quality chances.

The deciding factor is trajectory and timing. Anaheim's recent hot streak and Utah's cold spell pull the Ducks' way, but the underlying 5v5 play remains nearly identical. Utah's worse luck and Anaheim's regression window make this a genuine coin flip—the kind of matchup where the team that handles variance better wins.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

UTA
Dylan Guenther28G 15A
1.02 xG/60 · 3 HD · 16.8% sh
Daniil But2G 2A
1.01 xG/60 · 1 HD · 5.6% sh
ANA
Beckett Sennecke20G 19A
1.03 xG/60 · 8 HD · 13.5% sh
Cutter Gauthier25G 16A
0.99 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.9% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters