CGY 4–1 UTA Final · W
Flames/Schedule/Recap Sun, Apr 12, 2026 · 2025-26 regular season
Calgary Flames
CGY · 33-38-9
4–1
FinalW
Utah Mammoth
UTA · 42-32-6
1ST2ND3RDT CGY 2140326423 UTA 04011114129 goals · shots on goal
Meeting 3 this season — the Flames lead the season series 2–1
CGY 33-38-9 · UTA 42-32-6 · Meeting 3 this season — the Flames lead the season series 2–1

Flames beat the Mammoth

The Flames earned it: 2.7 expected goals to 2.1, and a 4–1 win to show for it. Dustin Wolf stopped 2.0 more goals than an average goalie would have.

Who had the better chances

The Flames created the better chances: 2.7 expected goals to 2.1, on 23 and 29 shots on goal.

CGY 2.7 xG · 23 shots UTA 2.1 xG · 29 shots
0
1
2
3
1st · the swing 1.5 · 0.3
2nd 0.3 · 1.1
3rd 0.8 · 0.7
Tap a numbered goal to see how it happened.
Deserve to winReplay this game 100 times with average goalies and the Flames win 60.
CGY 60%UTA 40%

Goals and penalties

5 goals · 0 penalties
← Flames shoot this way Mammoth shoot this way →
On net Missed Bigger = better chance 1Goal, numbered to the list
1st period
1
Morgan Frost, Brayden Pachal · wrap around shot, a low-percentage shot (6%) that found a way in
1–0
2
08:27 Connor Zary GWG
Zayne Parekh, Zach Whitecloud · deflected shot on a rebound, a low-percentage shot (7%) that found a way in
2–0
2nd period
No goals or penalties.
3rd period
3
Blake Coleman, Brayden Pachal · poke shot, a great chance (67%)
3–0
4
Aydar Suniev, Olli Maatta · slap shot, a low-percentage shot (2%) that found a way in
4–0
5
Clayton Keller, MacKenzie Weegar · wrist shot, a low-percentage shot (2%) that found a way in
4–1
No penalties
Goaltending
+2.0
vs expected
28/29 saves · 1 GA · 3.0 xGA Stopped 2.0 more goals than an average goalie would have.
−0.5
vs expected
19/23 saves · 4 GA · 3.5 xGA Gave up about what the shots he faced would predict.
Team CGYUTA
Shots on goal
23
29
Expected goals
2.7
2.1
Hits
0
0
Blocks
0
0
Power play
0/0
0/0
Penalty minutes
0
0