Backcheck
Recap · UTA at OTT

Senators hold off the Mammoth

The Senators earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.

By the ModelJul 11, 3:20 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
UTA
Utah Mammoth
2
Home
OTT
Ottawa Senators
4
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.63Expected goals4.21
54% share for the better side
31Shot attempts (SOG)25
6High-danger chances9
58Corsi (all attempts)48
Score-adjusted: 59% / 42%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The Mammoth should have scored more. Their 3.63 expected goals matched Ottawa's 4.21 closely, but their 2-goal loss did not. The difference was Meriläinen, whose 0.935 save percentage stopped one goal above expected—a 29-of-31 night that equaled Utah's 1.63-goal underperformance.

Ottawa won through precision, not volume. Outshot 31-25, they generated 0.088 expected goals per attempt versus Utah's 0.063, translating that advantage into nine high-danger chances to six. All four Senators goals came on the rush, driven by relentless net-front positioning. Underneath the scoreboard's margin lay a narrow game: Ottawa simply converted better.

Michael Amadio's tip-in from the doorstep at 3:46 of the third period marked the turning point. By then, the Senators had seized control.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
UTA2 / 6 · 1.45 xG
OTT2 / 9 · 2.63 xG
Medium dangermid-range
UTA0 / 16 · 1.67 xG
OTT1 / 11 · 1.13 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
UTA0 / 36 · 0.52 xG
OTT1 / 28 · 0.45 xG

UTA went 0-for-16 from medium danger on 1.67 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
UTA
2 G · 3.63 xG · -1.6
OTT
4 G · 4.21 xG · -0.2
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
V. VanecekUTA
+0.2
L. MeriläinenOTT
+1.6

UTA finished -1.6 against expected, OTT -0.2 — L. Meriläinen (OTT) saved 1.6 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
UTA
WRIST1/25
SNAP0/11
TIP IN0/1
SLAP0/3
BACKHAND1/2
POKE0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/13
OTT
WRIST1/17
SNAP0/2
TIP IN1/7
SLAP1/4
BACKHAND0/3
POKE0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND1/1
OTHER0/11
UTA
OTT
Off the rush
1 G on 30 · 2.63 xG
4 G on 21 · 2.42 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 5 · 0.77 xG
0 G on 3 · 0.64 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: UTA went 1-for-25, OTT 1-for-17. OTT scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
J. Spence
#10 · D · OTT
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 20:01 TOI · +2
R. Greig
#71 · C · OTT
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 17:55 TOI · +2
D. Cozens
#24 · C · OTT
0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 14:20 TOI · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • UTA generated higher-quality looks than the shot total suggests.
  • L. Meriläinen (OTT) stopped 1.6 goals above expected.
  • Open game — 15 high-danger chances combined (OTT 9, UTA 6).
  • OTT generated far more dangerous chances — 0.088 xG/shot vs 0.063. Quality over quantity.
  • OTT was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 21 rush chances.
  • OTT created 3 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • UTA created 5 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • UTA underperformed xG by 1.6 — wasted quality chances.
  • L. Meriläinen (OTT) saved 1.6 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · UTA at OTT · 7:00 PM ET

Mammoth at Senators: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 3:18 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

55%
OTT
Model favorite
45%
55%
UTA50OTT

OTT by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score UTA 2.42.7 OTT; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

UTA← edge
edge →OTT
52.0%5v5 xG%56.0%
53.0%Corsi%53.0%
2.64xGF / 602.66
2.39xGA / 602.12
2.26Goals for / gm2.18
1.99Goals against / gm1.99
1.003PDO — luck, not skill0.993

OTT holds 5 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.003 vs 0.993) says UTA has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The projection lines say 55% Senators win probability with a 2.4–2.7 goal spread. Translation: this is indistinguishable from a coin flip.

The underlying play tilts slightly toward Ottawa. The Senators generate 56.0% expected goals at 5v5 while allowing the Mammoth just 52.0%—a clean three-point advantage in shot quality. Both teams match at 53.0% Corsi, suggesting the performance gap is pure skill, not shot volume. Ottawa's PDO sits at 0.993, indicating discipline; Utah's 1.003 suggests they're running slightly lucky.

Where Ottawa gains traction is rest. The Senators arrive on one day off; Utah on three. That's margin-of-error territory in a single game, but combined with Ottawa's underlying advantage, it becomes worth tracking. Watch whether goaltender L. Ullmark starts or if the workload falls to the backup—a back-to-back can force such decisions.

The matchup hinges on Utah's elite individual offense and Ottawa's complementary defensive weaknesses. Dylan Guenther carries the Mammoth's score-sheet, posting 1.02 xG/60 with 28 goals and 15 assists—a conversion rate of 16.8%, which means he's finishing those chances. Daniil But runs 1.01 xG/60 and hovers at 5.6% conversion; his 2 goals and 2 assists suggest he's pressing, not producing at his underlying rate.

Brady Tkachuk anchors Ottawa's attack at 1.19 xG/60, already converting at 7.5% through 11 goals and 20 assists. Dylan Cozens operates at 1.00 xG/60, converting at 9.5%, which places him among the steadier finishers available. Both are working effectively within the Senators' system.

The weak points expose themselves in Utah's Maveric Lamoureux and Ottawa's Nick Jensen. If either becomes a pinch point—drawn out of position or exploited on coverage—the other team's personnel can punish it. In a game this tight, those micro-decisions define the scoreline.

The model knows what it's saying: this one depends less on team structure and more on which depth contributor shows up ready.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
OTT
Brady Tkachuk11G 20A
1.19 xG/60 · 2 HD · 7.5% sh
Dylan Cozens13G 15A
1.00 xG/60 · 1 HD · 9.5% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters