Pittsburgh Penguins vs Utah Mammoth — October 19, 2026 Game Stats

Game Recap

The Utah Mammoth prevailed 5-4 in a high-scoring affair against the Pittsburgh Penguins on October 19, 2026. UTA had a big edge in high-danger chances, 13-6 over PIT at 5-on-5. At 5-on-5, UTA carried the play with 3.29 expected goals and a 58.4% share of shot attempts.

← Back to Games

xG Gameflow — cumulative expected goals chart tracking each team's xG as Pittsburgh Penguins vs Utah Mammoth progressed on Oct 19, 2026
Shot heatmap — where shots were taken on the ice, color-coded by scoring probability
Event timeline — every goal, penalty, and key play mapped chronologically
Player matchup grid — head-to-head on-ice performance in Corsi and expected goals
Strength filter — 5v5 by default, with options for power play, penalty kill, and all situations

PIT4 - 5UTA

Oct 19, 2026 · Regular Season

Strength:

Overview

	Period	Corsi			Fenwick			Shots			SC			HDSC			xG			Goals
		F	A	%	F	A	%	F	A	%	F	A	%	F	A	%	F	A	%	F	A	%
UTA	P1	28	17	62.2	22	9	71.0	16	6	72.7	23	7	76.7	6	2	75.0	1.75	0.48	78.5	2	1	66.7
	P2	17	15	53.1	10	10	50.0	8	7	53.3	13	11	54.2	4	3	57.1	0.99	0.77	56.2	2	1	66.7
	P3	17	16	51.5	14	12	53.8	5	6	45.5	15	14	51.7	6	5	54.5	1.17	0.93	55.7	1	2	33.3
	Total	62	48	56.4	46	31	59.7	29	19	60.4	51	32	61.4	16	10	61.5	3.91	2.18	64.2	5	4	55.6
PIT	P1	17	28	37.8	9	22	29.0	6	16	27.3	7	23	23.3	2	6	25.0	0.48	1.75	21.5	1	2	33.3
	P2	15	17	46.9	10	10	50.0	7	8	46.7	11	13	45.8	3	4	42.9	0.77	0.99	43.8	1	2	33.3
	P3	16	17	48.5	12	14	46.2	6	5	54.5	14	15	48.3	5	6	45.5	0.93	1.17	44.3	2	1	66.7
	Total	48	62	43.6	31	46	40.3	19	29	39.6	32	51	38.6	10	16	38.5	2.18	3.91	35.8	4	5	44.4

Win Probability

UTA Favored

PIT Favored

Goal

Power Play

Gameflow — Cumulative xG

UTA

PIT

Goal

Shot Density Heatmap

PIT Attempts

UTA Attempts

Individual Event Map

Player:

PIT ShootUTA Shoot

Shot on Net

Missed Shot

Hit

Hit Taken

Giveaway

Player Matchup Grid

This grid shows how every skater on the home team (UTA) performed against every skater on the away team (PIT) when they were on the ice at the same time.

Rows = UTA players, Columns = PIT players. Forwards are listed first, then defensemen.
Green = the UTA player had a favorable matchup (above 50%). Red = unfavorable (below 50%).
Values shown from the home team's perspective. Toggle between CF% (shot attempt share) and xGF% (expected goal share).
Cells with fewer than 3 shared events are grayed out (insufficient sample). Hover over any cell for full details.

Stat:

UTA ↓ / PIT →	Dewar	Kindel	Lizotte	Crosby	Malkin	Novak	Robertson	Kuzmenko	Rakell	Chinakhov	Rust	Koivunen	Karlsson	Stastney	Carlile	Korczak	Letang	Solovyov
Cooley	79	82	56	55	75	17	60	29	60	50	44	50	67	67	60	60	63	78
Schmaltz	82	92	17	100	73	75	50	33	78	83	100	80	68	65	91	90	100	100
Stenlund	75	29	0	73	75	60	0	17	50	63	75	75	58	57	80	71	60	60
Trocheck	57	100	50	42	67	20	50	40	57	45	36	50	44	67	36	45	57	67
McBain	100	33	—	67	73	71	—	20	63	50	67	71	54	57	73	100	56	56
Hayton	75	44	80	75	50	0	75	50	50	44	67	50	50	75	57	50	57	80
Crouse	40	80	0	86	70	67	0	33	57	83	88	78	59	63	60	50	100	100
But	100	43	—	67	75	75	—	20	67	50	67	78	57	63	73	100	60	60
Lee	75	50	80	75	50	0	75	56	50	50	67	50	50	75	67	57	57	80
Keller	82	92	17	100	75	70	40	33	78	83	100	82	65	65	91	82	88	100
Guenther	79	100	56	60	75	17	55	40	63	57	50	50	63	67	67	63	56	75
Yamamoto	75	50	80	75	50	0	75	50	57	50	67	50	57	75	57	50	57	83
Weegar	60	60	44	72	73	57	60	35	56	67	69	85	52	67	71	85	64	64
Sergachev	80	77	50	63	75	50	50	50	57	58	58	67	47	60	74	82	73	89
Schmidt	60	38	43	71	71	29	38	17	56	50	67	50	57	67	45	22	56	75
Peeke	56	33	44	70	57	14	44	17	50	50	67	50	50	57	50	44	50	63
Simashev	75	70	33	67	43	50	67	45	88	46	57	80	67	67	50	56	63	57
DeSimone	80	67	50	50	100	40	33	63	57	44	63	33	63	60	44	22	75	100