Backcheck
Recap · LAK at UTA

Mammoth edge the Kings in overtime

The Mammoth won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

By the ModelJul 12, 8:30 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
LAK
Los Angeles Kings
3
Home
UTA
Utah Mammoth
4
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

4.33Expected goals4.33
50% share for the better side
36Shot attempts (SOG)34
8High-danger chances9
79Corsi (all attempts)62
Score-adjusted: 57% / 43%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The Mammoth defeated the Kings 4–3 in overtime, surviving a game where the underlying metrics suggested a dead heat. Expected goals split 4.33–4.33, a perfectly even split—yet the Kings scored just three.

K. Vejmelka's brilliance made the difference. The Mammoth netminder saved 1.33 goals above expected, posting a 0.917 SV% on 33 of 36 shots. On high-danger chances specifically, he was perfect: 100% on 8 shots. D. Kuemper, meanwhile, allowed a 0.882 SV% (30/34) for the Kings—the Kings' underperformance (−1.33 xG) was almost entirely chance variance, not volume.

The Mammoth held 49% of shot attempts (34–36 on goal) and 9–8 in high-danger chances—marginal edges that wouldn't explain an overtime win. But the Kings' execution abandoned them when it mattered: 0 for 8 on high-danger chances. The Mammoth found their edge on the rush, converting 2 of 24 chances. The Kings also converted 2 rushes—on 29 attempts—a statistical tie that masked a timing problem.

N. Schmaltz ended it at 01:46 of overtime with a snap shot from a sharp angle, the final blow to a Kings team that had created opportunities but couldn't convert them into goals.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
LAK0 / 8 · 1.74 xG
UTA3 / 9 · 2.22 xG
Medium dangermid-range
LAK2 / 19 · 1.99 xG
UTA1 / 13 · 1.46 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
LAK1 / 52 · 0.60 xG
UTA0 / 40 · 0.66 xG

LAK went 0-for-8 from high danger on 1.74 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
LAK
3 G · 4.33 xG · -1.3
UTA
4 G · 4.33 xG · -0.3
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
D. KuemperLAK
+0.3
K. VejmelkaUTA
+1.3

LAK finished -1.3 against expected, UTA -0.3 — K. Vejmelka (UTA) saved 1.3 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
LAK
SNAP2/29
WRIST1/11
SLAP0/5
TIP IN0/7
BACKHAND0/3
POKE0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
BAT0/0
OTHER0/22
UTA
SNAP3/27
WRIST0/6
SLAP0/7
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND0/2
POKE0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
BAT1/1
OTHER0/15
LAK
UTA
Off the rush
2 G on 29 · 2.84 xG
2 G on 24 · 2.33 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 7 · 1.02 xG
1 G on 5 · 0.84 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: LAK went 2-for-29, UTA 3-for-27. LAK scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
L. Crouse
#67 · L · UTA
2 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 17:41 TOI · +1
Q. Byfield
#55 · R · LAK
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 21:01 TOI
N. Schmaltz
#8 · C · UTA
2 G · 0 A · 7 SOG · 15:59 TOI · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • K. Vejmelka (UTA) stopped 1.3 goals above expected.
  • Open game — 17 high-danger chances combined (UTA 9, LAK 8).
  • LAK couldn't convert — 0/8 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • UTA was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 24 rush chances.
  • LAK was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 29 rush chances.
  • UTA created 5 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • LAK created 7 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • K. Vejmelka was a wall on HD chances — 100% SV on 8 high-danger shots.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · LAK at UTA · 9:00 PM ET

Kings at Mammoth: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 12, 8:29 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

52%
UTA
Model favorite
48%
52%
LAK50UTA

UTA by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score LAK 2.42.5 UTA; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

LAK← edge
edge →UTA
52.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
52.0%Corsi%53.0%
2.42xGF / 602.64
2.20xGA / 602.39
1.85Goals for / gm2.26
1.71Goals against / gm1.99
1.002PDO — luck, not skill1.003

UTA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.002 vs 1.003) says UTA has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.4-2.5 game with the Mammoth at 52% win probability — this matchup defies prediction. Both teams are matched across every meaningful dimension.

Their 5v5 metrics are nearly identical: both at 52.0% xG%, the Kings at 52.0% Corsi% and Utah at 53.0%, PDO values of 1.002 and 1.003 respectively. Neither team has seized underlying advantage. When the numbers split this evenly, variance takes over.

Both V. Vanecek and A. Forsberg are on back-to-backs, which means either team faces potential fatigue — a backup start, or a starter running on empty at a critical moment.

Alex Laferriere is the Kings' primary scoring threat: 16 goals on 0.87 xG/60 suggests he's efficiently converting chances, backed by 2 high-danger goals and a 9.9% shooting rate that should hold. Jared Wright has generated 0.83 xG/60 without scoring (0G, 4A), which means whether he produces will shape the Kings' ceiling tonight.

Utah's Dylan Guenther operates at another tier: 28 goals at 1.02 xG/60, with 3 high-danger goals and a 16.8% shooting rate. He's both generating elite volume and finishing at an elite rate — a rare pairing. Daniil But adds 1.01 xG/60 (2G, 5.6% shooting, 1 high-danger goal), indicating Utah has secondary scoring depth even if But's goal total lags his shot quality.

Los Angeles's defensive liability is Adrian Kempe; Utah's is Maveric Lamoureux. In a game this close, defensive matchup exposure becomes the deciding margin.

Both teams face a task: the Kings must contain Guenther, Utah must focus on Laferriere. Both teams also carry identical statistical anomalies — 0% high-danger goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate — that may or may not repeat.

This is a genuine coin flip masquerading as hockey.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

LAK
Alex Laferriere16G 18A
0.87 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.9% sh
Jared Wright0G 4A
0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters