Pittsburgh Penguins at Utah Mammoth, NHL forecast
Win probability
Starts from the pregame forecast, then moves with every score and the time left. Above the line favors UTA; hover for each play.
Game center
From the ESPN box score.
Top performers
Penguins- Rickard RakellGoals1
- Bryan RustAssists2
- Erik KarlssonPoints2
Mammoth- Nate SchmidtGoals1
- Nate SchmidtAssists1
- Nate SchmidtPoints2
Scoring summary
- P314:55Declan Carlile Goal (3) Wrist Shot, assists: Rickard Rakell (3), Kaedan Korczak (5)4–5
- P32:55Egor Chinakhov Goal (2) Snap Shot, assists: Andrei Kuzmenko (1), Spencer Stastney (1)3–5
- P31:36Nick Schmaltz Goal (7) Backhand, assists: Clayton Keller (9), Logan Cooley (8)2–5
- P214:40Kailer Yamamoto Goal (2) Tip-In, assists: Nate Schmidt (2), Barrett Hayton (6)2–4
- P211:44Nate Schmidt Goal (1) Slap Shot, assists: Kevin Stenlund (4), Daniil But (2)2–3
- P27:01Rickard Rakell Goal (1) Wrist Shot, assists: Bryan Rust (2), Erik Karlsson (10)2–2
- P110:10Kevin Stenlund Goal (1) Wrist Shot, assists: Mikhail Sergachev (8), Jack McBain (2)1–2
- P16:00Clayton Keller Goal (4) Backhand, assists: Lawson Crouse (3), Nick Schmaltz (6)1–1
- P11:11Erik Karlsson Goal (1) Slap Shot, assists: Bryan Rust (1), Tommy Novak (5)1–0
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.
- P11:11Erik Karlsson Goal (1) Slap Shot, assists: Bryan Rust (1), Tommy Novak (5)PIT 1 – 0 UTA · PIT 38% → 52% +15PIT 38% → 52%+15 pts
- P16:00Clayton Keller Goal (4) Backhand, assists: Lawson Crouse (3), Nick Schmaltz (6)PIT 1 – 1 UTA · UTA 46% → 62% +15UTA 46% → 62%+15 pts
- P110:10Kevin Stenlund Goal (1) Wrist Shot, assists: Mikhail Sergachev (8), Jack McBain (2)PIT 1 – 2 UTA · UTA 61% → 75% +14UTA 61% → 75%+14 pts
- P27:01Rickard Rakell Goal (1) Wrist Shot, assists: Bryan Rust (2), Erik Karlsson (10)PIT 2 – 2 UTA · PIT 23% → 41% +17PIT 23% → 41%+17 pts
- P211:44Nate Schmidt Goal (1) Slap Shot, assists: Kevin Stenlund (4), Daniil But (2)PIT 2 – 3 UTA · UTA 58% → 77% +19UTA 58% → 77%+19 pts
The pick
Locked forecast: logged before the game started and graded as-is. Anchored on the betting line, which beat every rating model in testing.
Mammoth 62%
Forecast Elo ratings alone
How often that comes true: NHL favorites the forecast gave 60–65% have won 62.4% of 599 graded games.
- Market
- UTA 62%
- ML PIT +154 / UTA -185
- Pre-line forecast
- UTA 58%
- Elo + market-implied
- Elo ratings
- UTA 58%
- Ratings vs. market
- −4.6 pts
- UTA: Elo 57.7%, market 62.2%
- Fair odds
- UTA -165
- PIT +165 · the forecast as odds, no margin
- Pregame projection
- PIT 2.9 – 3.6 UTA
- 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 | PIT | UTA | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Team rating | 1487 | 1515 | Elo entering the game; 1500 is league average |
| Home field | — | +35 | Worth 35 Elo in the NHL |
| Starting goalies | 0 | −9 | PIT: Arturs Silovs: team allows 0.01 fewer goals than with its usual starter (≈37 weighted starts) · UTA: Sebastian Cossa: team allows 0.22 more goals than with its usual starter (≈2 weighted starts) |
| Elo ratings | UTA +54 Elo | UTA 57.7% | |
| Market-implied ratings | UTA 57.7% | Team strength as past closing lines priced it, same game context | |
| Pre-line forecast | UTA 57.7% | 20% Elo, 80% market-implied (log-odds blend) | |
| Forecast | UTA 62.2% | 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. Opponent Elo: how strong the teams each has played are, 1st the toughest. 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.
| PIT | Stat | UTA |
|---|---|---|
| 12th of 323.2 | Goals scored | 3.76th of 32 |
| 26th of 323.7 | Goals allowed | 3.011th of 32 |
| 23rd of 32−0.4 | Margin | +0.710th of 32 |
| 14th of 3250.6% | Shot share | 56.9%4th of 32 |
| 23rd of 3287.9% | Save percentage | 87.3%26th of 32 |
| 26th of 321–5 | Road vs home | 2–19th of 32 |
| 12th of 321509 | Opponent Elo | 149821st of 32 |
| 18th of 321494 | Elo rating | 151513th 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 |  PIT |  UTA |
|---|---|---|
| Puck line | 4–5 | 5–4 |
| Last 10 | 4–5 | 5–4 |
| Favorite | 0–2 | 4–3 |
| Underdog | 4–3 | 1–1 |
| Overs–unders | 6–3 | 5–4 |
| Overs–unders, last 10 | 6–3 | 5–4 |
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
PIT 2–2 UTA in their last 4 meetings; the forecast called 2 of 4.
