Backcheck
Recap · WPG at UTA

Mammoth run the Jets off the ice on the underlying numbers

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

By the ModelJul 12, 11:44 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
WPG
Winnipeg Jets
3
Home
UTA
Utah Mammoth
5
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.90Expected goals5.24
64% share for the better side
24Shot attempts (SOG)36
5High-danger chances8
46Corsi (all attempts)74
Score-adjusted: 43% / 57%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Utah's 5-3 win over Winnipeg was more convincing than the score. The Mammoth dominated expected goals 5.24 to 2.90—a 64-36 split that reflected total control.

Utah held 60% of shot attempts (36-24) and won high-danger chances 8-5, converting 50% of them. The Mammoth were ruthless off the rush with 3 goals on 32 chances. On the power play, Utah scored twice on 15 shots (1.31 xG) versus Winnipeg's two goals on 6 attempts (0.63 xG).

E. Comrie stopped 31 of 35 shots, posting a save percentage 1.24 goals above expected. K. Vejmelka finished at 0.875 save percentage (21-24). Both teams crashed the net effectively—Utah with 4 rebound opportunities (1 converted), Winnipeg with 6 opportunities (1 converted).

Alexander Kerfoot's wrist shot from the high slot in the third period proved decisive.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
WPG1 / 5 · 1.08 xG
UTA4 / 8 · 2.38 xG
Medium dangermid-range
WPG2 / 13 · 1.29 xG
UTA1 / 22 · 2.18 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
WPG0 / 28 · 0.53 xG
UTA0 / 44 · 0.68 xG

UTA went 4-for-8 from high danger on 2.38 expected goals — 1.6 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
WPG
3 G · 2.90 xG · +0.1
UTA
5 G · 5.24 xG · -0.2
0123456
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
E. ComrieWPG
+1.2
K. VejmelkaUTA
-0.1

WPG finished +0.1 against expected, UTA -0.2 — E. Comrie (WPG) saved 1.2 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
WPG
SNAP2/18
SLAP0/7
WRIST1/6
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/10
UTA
SNAP0/21
SLAP0/13
WRIST4/10
TIP IN0/8
BACKHAND1/4
DEFLECTED0/2
OTHER0/16
WPG
UTA
Off the rush
1 G on 20 · 1.81 xG
3 G on 32 · 2.82 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 6 · 0.84 xG
1 G on 4 · 0.61 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: WPG went 2-for-18, UTA 0-for-21. UTA scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
N. Schmaltz
#8 · C · UTA
2 G · 0 A · 8 SOG · 21:21 TOI · -1
M. Scheifele
#55 · C · WPG
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 21:14 TOI · -1
K. Connor
#81 · L · WPG
1 G · 1 A · 6 SOG · 20:52 TOI · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • E. Comrie (WPG) stopped 1.2 goals above expected.
  • UTA was clinical in the high-danger zone — 4/8 on HD chances (50%).
  • UTA was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 32 rush chances.
  • UTA created 4 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • WPG created 6 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • UTA power play was dominant — 2 PPG on 15 PP shots (1.31 xG).
  • WPG power play was dominant — 2 PPG on 6 PP shots (0.63 xG).
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · WPG at UTA · 9:00 PM ET

The Mammoth are the model's lean over the Jets on the rest edge

By the ModelJul 12, 11:41 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

56%
UTA
Model favorite
44%
56%
WPG50UTA

UTA by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score WPG 2.42.7 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

WPG← edge
edge →UTA
48.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
49.0%Corsi%53.0%
2.34xGF / 602.64
2.55xGA / 602.39
1.90Goals for / gm2.26
2.10Goals against / gm1.99
0.998PDO — luck, not skill1.003

UTA holds 6 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.998 vs 1.003) says UTA has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model gives Utah the edge—the Mammoth project at 56% win probability and a 2.4–2.7 goal range. The case rests on two legs: Utah's dominant underlying metrics and Winnipeg's rest deficit.

Utah's xG split of 52.0% to 48.0% tells you who controls the game at even strength. The Corsi gap widens to 53.0% for the Mammoth versus 49.0% for the Jets, suggesting territorial tilt toward Utah. This isn't close.

The rest advantage tilts the same way. Utah enters on one day of rest; Winnipeg on three. More rest doesn't automatically yield better play, but Utah's metrics are strong enough that the advantage carries weight here. V. Vanecek plays on a back-to-back, complicating Winnipeg's goaltending picture. Watch whether he starts or a backup gets the call.

Nino Niederreiter is Winnipeg's engine: 0.87 xG per 60, six goals, six assists, and three high-danger chances. His 8.6% shooting rate suggests regression risk, but the volume and quality remain real. Kyle Connor runs a similar workload at 0.83 xG per 60, with 25 goals and 30 assists. His 13.0% shooting rate is closer to sustainable.

Utah's corresponding threat is Dylan Guenther, who leads with 1.02 xG per 60, 28 goals, and 15 assists—the most prolific scorer in this matchup. His 16.8% shooting rate is elevated, but three high-danger chances suggest the volume carries risk. Daniil But offers another offensive threat at 1.01 xG per 60, though the injury alert—hasn't played in 19 days—likely removes him from the equation.

Both offenses have hit the same tactical wall: 0% of goals arrive as high-danger plays, and 0% come off rebounds. Colin Miller is Winnipeg's defensive weak link in key matchups. Utah's corresponding liability is Maveric Lamoureux.

The Mammoth are favored on the strength of their possession metrics and Utah's rest edge over Winnipeg's tired goaltender.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

WPG
Nino Niederreiter6G 6A
0.87 xG/60 · 3 HD · 8.6% sh
Kyle Connor25G 30A
0.83 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.0% 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