Mammoth run the Penguins off the ice on the underlying numbers
The Mammoth earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.
The underlying story
Pittsburgh's elite finishing kept this close—they scored four goals on just 1.37 expected goals, outperforming prediction by 2.63 goals. But Utah's dominance prevailed: they controlled 72% of 5v5 expected goals (3.58–1.37) and won 5-4 in overtime.
Utah's volume was overwhelming. They generated 36 attempts to Pittsburgh's 16, creating one high-danger chance to zero. S. Murashov's 0.861 save percentage on 36 shots and K. Vejmelka's 0.750 on 16 reflected the workload disparity. Dylan Guenther's wrist shot from the top of the circles at 00:42 of overtime decided it.
The danger ladder
PIT went 3-for-9 from medium danger on 0.96 expected goals — 2.0 above expected.
Finishing vs expected
UTA finished +1.4 against expected, PIT +2.6 — K. Vejmelka (UTA) allowed 2.6 more goals than expected.
Shot diet
Wrist shots carried the volume: UTA went 5-for-44, PIT 1-for-14. UTA scored 4 of theirs off the rush.
- K. Vejmelka (UTA) gave up 2.6 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
- UTA scored 3 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
- PIT was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 16 rush chances.
- UTA was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 38 rush chances.
- UTA created 4 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
- PIT outperformed their expected goals by 2.6 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.