WPG 5–2 UTA Final · W
Jets/Schedule/Recap Sat, Jan 25, 2025 · 2024-25 regular season
Winnipeg Jets
WPG · 33-14-3
5–2
FinalW
Utah Mammoth
UTA · 21-20-7
1ST2ND3RDT WPG 11011138529 UTA 051915219 goals · shots on goal
Meeting 3 this season — the Jets lead the season series 2–1
WPG 33-14-3 · UTA 21-20-7 · Meeting 3 this season — the Jets lead the season series 2–1

Jets beat the Mammoth

The Jets earned it: 2.9 expected goals to 1.8, and a 5–2 win to show for it. Connor Ingram allowed 1.1 more goals than expected from the shots he faced.

Who had the better chances

The Jets created the better chances: 2.9 expected goals to 1.8, on 29 and 19 shots on goal.

WPG 2.9 xG · 29 shots UTA 1.8 xG · 19 shots
0
1
2
3
1st 0.9 · 0.4
2nd 0.6 · 0.9
3rd · the swing 1.4 · 0.5
Tap a numbered goal to see how it happened.
Deserve to winReplay this game 100 times with average goalies and the Jets win 68.
WPG 68%UTA 32%

Goals and penalties

7 goals · 0 penalties
← Jets shoot this way Mammoth shoot this way →
On net Missed Bigger = better chance 1Goal, numbered to the list
1st period
1
17:52 Cole Perfetti PP
Nikolaj Ehlers, Gabriel Vilardi · snap shot, a good chance (17%)
1–0
2nd period
2
01:13 Nick Schmaltz PP
Michael Kesselring, Clayton Keller · tip in shot, a good chance (11%)
1–1
3
Dylan DeMelo · snap shot, a good chance (21%)
2–1
3rd period
4
John Marino, Clayton Keller · wrist shot, a low-percentage shot (9%) that found a way in
2–2
5
05:51 Cole Perfetti GWG
Vladislav Namestnikov, Dylan DeMelo · snap shot, a great chance (31%)
3–2
6
Unassisted · backhand shot, a good chance (17%)
4–2
7
18:15 Cole Perfetti EN
Nikolaj Ehlers, Neal Pionk · wrist shot, into an empty net
5–2
No penalties
Goaltending
−0.2
vs expected
17/19 saves · 2 GA · 1.8 xGA Gave up about what the shots he faced would predict.
−1.1
vs expected
24/28 saves · 4 GA · 2.9 xGA Allowed 1.1 more goals than expected from the shots he faced.
Team WPGUTA
Shots on goal
29
19
Expected goals
2.9
1.8
Hits
0
0
Blocks
0
0
Power play
1/0
1/0
Penalty minutes
0
0