The Ducks won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.
Utah created more scoring chances but Anaheim executed better, the Ducks' 4–1 victory hinging entirely on conversion. The Mammoth generated eight high-danger chances to Anaheim's six, yet finished 0-for-8 in the danger area. The Ducks punished their opportunities: 4 goals on 6 chances (67%).
Possession favored Utah. The Mammoth commanded 56% of shot attempts (30–24 on goal), yet found themselves chasing a three-goal deficit. When underlying metrics closer to the outcome—expected goals split 4.65–4.39—suggest a nearly even game, execution becomes everything.
L. Dostal's goaltending was the execution that mattered most. The Ducks netminder stopped 29 of 30 shots, posting a 0.967 save percentage and saving 3.39 goals above expected. He turned a game the numbers called even into a comfortable Anaheim win. V. Vanecek, meanwhile, posted a 0.909 save percentage, stopping 20 of 22 shots.
Anaheim's shot quality explains the lopsided scoreline. At 0.093 expected goals per shot, the Ducks generated cleaner looks than the Mammoth's 0.059. Utah played the possession game; Anaheim played the efficiency game and won. The Ducks' rush game proved lethal—two goals on 19 rush chances—while Utah crashed the crease for four rebound opportunities without converting any.
The gap between volume and finish was Utah's undoing. Eight high-danger chances represents genuine opportunity. Zero goals on those chances represents capitulation. Anaheim, disciplined and sharp, delivered the punishment Utah couldn't inflict.
