Utah Hockey Club at Edmonton Oilers, NHL forecast
Win probability
Starts from the pregame forecast, then moves with every score and the time left. Above the line favors EDM; hover for each play.
Game center
From the ESPN box score.
Top performers
Utah HC- Sean DurziGoals1
- Michael CarconeAssists1
- Sean DurziPoints1
Oilers- Zach HymanGoals2
- Ryan Nugent-HopkinsAssists2
- Zach HymanPoints3
Scoring summary
- P32:36Viktor Arvidsson Goal (10) Backhand, assists: none1–7
- P30:33Mattias Ekholm Goal (9) Snap Shot, assists: Zach Hyman (16)1–6
- P216:26Sean Durzi Goal (2) Slap Shot, assists: Logan Cooley (31), Michael Carcone (11)1–5
- P29:53Vasily Podkolzin Goal (7) Snap Shot, assists: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (28)0–5
- P27:41Zach Hyman Goal (24) Deflected, assists: Mattias Ekholm (21), Connor McDavid (63)0–4
- P119:56Connor McDavid Goal (26) Backhand, assists: Evan Bouchard (41), Mattias Ekholm (20)0–3
- P115:14Zach Hyman Goal (23) Tip-In, assists: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (27), Connor McDavid (62)0–2
- P112:28Ryan Nugent-Hopkins Goal (17) Backhand, assists: none0–1
Turning points
The 5 plays that swung the win chance most, each judged at its own moment: the chance with the score just before it against just after.
- P112:28Ryan Nugent-Hopkins Goal (17) Backhand, assists: noneUTAH 0 – 1 EDM · EDM 57% → 72% +15EDM 57% → 72%+15 pts
- P115:14Zach Hyman Goal (23) Tip-In, assists: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (27), Connor McDavid (62)UTAH 0 – 2 EDM · EDM 72% → 85% +12EDM 72% → 85%+12 pts
- P119:56Connor McDavid Goal (26) Backhand, assists: Evan Bouchard (41), Mattias Ekholm (20)UTAH 0 – 3 EDM · EDM 85% → 93% +8EDM 85% → 93%+8 pts
- P27:41Zach Hyman Goal (24) Deflected, assists: Mattias Ekholm (21), Connor McDavid (63)UTAH 0 – 4 EDM · EDM 95% → 98% +3EDM 95% → 98%+3 pts
- P29:53Vasily Podkolzin Goal (7) Snap Shot, assists: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (28)UTAH 0 – 5 EDM · EDM 99% → >99% +1EDM 99% → >99%+1 pts
The pick
Reconstructed from what was known before the game: the ratings at that point and the closing line.
Oilers 58%
Forecast Elo ratings alone
How often that comes true: NHL favorites the forecast gave 55–60% have won 56.4% of 1,035 graded games.
- Market
- EDM 58%
- ML UTAH +130 / EDM -150
- Pre-line forecast
- EDM 62%
- Elo + market-implied
- Elo ratings
- EDM 64%
- Ratings vs. market
- +5.6 pts
- EDM: Elo 63.6%, market 58.0%
- Fair odds
- EDM -138
- UTAH +138 · the forecast as odds, no margin
- Pregame projection
- UTAH 3.0 – 3.5 EDM
- Margin from the forecast, posted total 6.5
How the number is built
Elo inputs in rating points (higher favors that team; 25–28 Elo is about a point of spread in football and basketball), then how the pieces combine.
| Factor | UTAH | EDM | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Team rating | 1488 | 1553 | Elo entering the game; 1500 is league average |
| Home field | — | +35 | Worth 35 Elo in the NHL |
| Starting goalies | +3 | 0 | UTAH: Karel Vejmelka: team allows 0.09 fewer goals than with its usual starter (≈28 weighted starts) · EDM: Calvin Pickard: team allows 0.00 fewer goals than with its usual starter (≈29 weighted starts) |
| Elo ratings | EDM +97 Elo | EDM 63.6% | |
| Market-implied ratings | EDM 62.2% | Team strength as past closing lines priced it, same game context | |
| Pre-line forecast | EDM 62.5% | 20% Elo, 80% market-implied (log-odds blend) | |
| Forecast | EDM 58.0% | Follows the market (vig removed): in testing, adding the ratings made it less accurate | |
Tale of the tape
This season coming into the game, regular season, each number with its league rank (the longer the bar, the higher). Home and road: the host's record at home against the visitor's on the road. Overtime and shootout losses count as losses in these records. Shot share is a team's share of the shots on goal in its games. PDO adds shooting and save percentages: far from 100 tends to even out.
| UTAH | Stat | EDM |
|---|---|---|
| 21st of 322.8 | Goals scored | 3.211th of 32 |
| 16th of 323.0 | Goals allowed | 2.912th of 32 |
| 18th of 32−0.1 | Margin | +0.310th of 32 |
| 12th of 3250.6% | Shot share | 54.1%3rd of 32 |
| 15th of 3290.2% | Save percentage | 89.7%20th of 32 |
| 8th of 326–4 | Last 10 | 5–513th of 32 |
| 11th of 3217–17 | Road vs home | 20–1311th of 32 |
Rating history
Each team's Elo over the last two seasons. Hover or drag to compare on any date.
Recent form
Last five results, and whether the forecast hit.
Against the line
How each team has done against the closing spread and total, coming into this game.
| This season |  UTAH |  EDM |
|---|---|---|
| Puck line | 30–37 | 23–44 |
| Last 10 | 4–6 | 3–7 |
| Favorite | 9–24 | 17–42 |
| Underdog | 21–13 | 6–2 |
| Overs–unders | 28–39 | 29–38 |
| Overs–unders, last 10 | 3–7 | 3–7 |
Against each game's closing line. Books set every line knowing these records: across 3,901 past games, the team with the better record against the spread so far that season covered 51.2%, short of the 52.4% a standard −110 bet needs, and over/under streaks held 48.0% of the time. They describe the past.
Head to head
UTAH 0–2 EDM in their last 2 meetings; the forecast called 2 of 2.