Utah Mammoth vs Tampa Bay Lightning prediction
Our pick
Utah Mammoth to win
incl. overtime · fair odds 1.94 · projected 3–2
Utah Mammoth are the pick at 51% on the moneyline, with a projected 3–2 final score against Tampa Bay Lightning.
After 60 minutes
Game flow
UTA 3.3 · TAM 3.0 expected goals in 60 minutesOur model's expected goals for each side in regulation, split by period the way both teams' last ten games went (goals scored and allowed per period).
Markets
- Moneyline (incl. overtime)Utah Mammoth51%1.94
- Regulation result (60 minutes)Utah Mammoth41%2.47
- Puck lineTampa Bay Lightning +1.570%1.43
- Total goalsUnder 6.550%2.00
- Both teams to scoreYes89%1.12
Probabilities come from a rating model fitted on this season's results; when bookmakers price the game they are blended with the market consensus.
Lines
Lines from the last game · may changeUtah Mammoth
Last game: Oct 22
1st line
6:44 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | Clayton Keller LW | 20:09 | 4 | 7 | 11 |
| 16 | Vincent Trocheck C | 17:39 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| 11 | Dylan Guenther RW | 20:10 | 4 | 5 | 9 |
25 points this season
2nd line
4:21 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 67 | Lawson Crouse LW | 12:52 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| 8 | Nick Schmaltz C | 17:49 | 7 | 6 | 13 |
| 92 | Logan Cooley RW | 17:25 | 3 | 5 | 8 |
25 points this season
3rd line
9:13 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 72 | Anders Lee LW | 12:05 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| 27 | Barrett Hayton C | 14:30 | 1 | 6 | 7 |
| 56 | Kailer Yamamoto RW | 13:44 | 2 | 4 | 6 |
18 points this season
4th line
7:41 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50 | Daniil But LW | 9:34 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| 82 | Kevin Stenlund C | 13:16 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| 22 | Jack McBain RW | 12:16 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
12 points this season
1st pair
15:16 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 98 | Mikhail Sergachev D | 26:58 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 52 | MacKenzie Weegar D | 22:36 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
3 points this season
2nd pair
10:56 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | Andrew Peeke D | 20:42 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| 88 | Nate Schmidt D | 20:13 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
6 points this season
3rd pair
5:48 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 26 | Dmitri Simashev D | 14:26 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
| 57 | Nick DeSimone D | 11:19 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2 points this season
Power play unit 1
4:01 together on the power play
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Dylan Guenther F | 20:10 | 4 | 5 | 9 |
| 9 | Clayton Keller F | 20:09 | 4 | 7 | 11 |
| 8 | Nick Schmaltz F | 17:49 | 7 | 6 | 13 |
| 92 | Logan Cooley F | 17:25 | 3 | 5 | 8 |
| 98 | Mikhail Sergachev D | 26:58 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
41 points this season
Power play unit 2
0:31 together on the power play
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16 | Vincent Trocheck F | 17:39 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| 27 | Barrett Hayton F | 14:30 | 1 | 6 | 7 |
| 56 | Kailer Yamamoto F | 13:44 | 2 | 4 | 6 |
| 72 | Anders Lee F | 12:05 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| 52 | MacKenzie Weegar D | 22:36 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
26 points this season
Penalty kill unit 1
1:09 together on the penalty kill
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 82 | Kevin Stenlund F | 13:16 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| 67 | Lawson Crouse F | 12:52 | 1 | 3 | 4 |
| 20 | Andrew Peeke D | 20:42 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| 88 | Nate Schmidt D | 20:13 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
15 points this season
Penalty kill unit 2
0:45 together on the penalty kill
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 16 | Vincent Trocheck F | 17:39 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| 27 | Barrett Hayton F | 14:30 | 1 | 6 | 7 |
| 98 | Mikhail Sergachev D | 26:58 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 52 | MacKenzie Weegar D | 22:36 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
15 points this season
Goalies: Karel Vejmelka #70 (Projected) · Sebastian Cossa #33 (Backup)
Tampa Bay Lightning
Last game: Oct 23
1st line
7:52 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | Brayden Point LW | 20:50 | 1 | 7 | 8 |
| 59 | Jake Guentzel C | 22:12 | 6 | 4 | 10 |
| 93 | Gage Goncalves RW | 17:59 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
19 points this season
2nd line
9:16 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 38 | Brandon Hagel LW | 20:33 | 7 | 6 | 13 |
| 71 | Anthony Cirelli C | 17:19 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| 86 | Nikita Kucherov RW | 20:43 | 4 | 8 | 12 |
30 points this season
3rd line
8:38 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 29 | Pontus Holmberg LW | 11:59 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| 28 | Zemgus Girgensons C | 12:55 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 95 | Ilya Mikheyev RW | 13:52 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
11 points this season
4th line: No such unit in that game.
1st pair
10:45 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 51 | Charle-Edouard D'Astous D | 21:06 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| 24 | Max Crozier D | 17:17 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
8 points this season
2nd pair
9:44 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 27 | Ryan McDonagh D | 17:27 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 81 | Erik Černák D | 16:44 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
2 points this season
3rd pair
10:56 together at 5-on-5
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 74 | John Carlson D | 18:15 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| 90 | J.J. Moser D | 15:15 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
5 points this season
Power play unit 1
4:41 together on the power play
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 59 | Jake Guentzel F | 22:12 | 6 | 4 | 10 |
| 21 | Brayden Point F | 20:50 | 1 | 7 | 8 |
| 86 | Nikita Kucherov F | 20:43 | 4 | 8 | 12 |
| 38 | Brandon Hagel F | 20:33 | 7 | 6 | 13 |
| 51 | Charle-Edouard D'Astous D | 21:06 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
48 points this season
Power play unit 2
1:09 together on the power play
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 93 | Gage Goncalves F | 17:59 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 71 | Anthony Cirelli F | 17:19 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| 94 | Conor Geekie F | 12:35 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 17 | Dominic James F | 12:28 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 74 | John Carlson D | 18:15 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
13 points this season
Penalty kill unit 1
1:23 together on the penalty kill
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 95 | Ilya Mikheyev F | 13:52 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| 28 | Zemgus Girgensons F | 12:55 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| 27 | Ryan McDonagh D | 17:27 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 81 | Erik Černák D | 16:44 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
8 points this season
Penalty kill unit 2
0:39 together on the penalty kill
| # | Player | TOI | G | A | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 38 | Brandon Hagel F | 20:33 | 7 | 6 | 13 |
| 71 | Anthony Cirelli F | 17:19 | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| 90 | J.J. Moser D | 15:15 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 77 | Victor Hedman D | 5:56 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
22 points this season
Goalies: Dennis Hildeby #35 (Projected) · Andrei Vasilevskiy #88 (Backup)
Swipe the rink to switch units
How we read the lines
From the NHL’s shift charts, the three forwards and the two defencemen who shared the most 5-on-5 ice time, ranked by time on ice. Coaches shuffle lines often, so treat them as a guide until puck drop. Power-play and penalty-kill units: the five (on the power play) or four (on the penalty kill) skaters who were on the ice together the longest in that situation. TOI: ice time in that game. G, A, P: goals, assists and points this season.
Photo credits (22)
- Mikhail Sergachev · Michael Miller, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Nick DeSimone · Jenn G from Seattle, WA, CC BY-SA 2.0
- Karel Vejmelka · Quintin Soloviev, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Sebastian Cossa · Kaiser matias, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Brayden Point · 5of7, CC BY-SA 2.0
- Jake Guentzel · Michael Miller, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Gage Goncalves · TheAHL, CC BY 2.0
- Brandon Hagel · Jenn G, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Anthony Cirelli · Michael Miller, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Nikita Kucherov · Resolute, CC BY-SA 3.0
- Pontus Holmberg · Jenn G from Seattle, WA, CC BY-SA 2.0
- Zemgus Girgensons · Michael Miller, CC BY-SA 3.0
- Ilya Mikheyev · Jenn G from Seattle, WA, CC BY-SA 2.0
- Charle-Edouard D'Astous · Atrox1912, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Ryan McDonagh · Resolute, CC BY-SA 3.0
- Erik Černák · Ailura, CC BY-SA 3.0 at
- John Carlson · Michael Miller, CC BY-SA 3.0
- J.J. Moser · Quintin Soloviev, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Conor Geekie · Russ Alman, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Victor Hedman · Lisa Gansky from New York, NY, USA, CC BY-SA 2.0
- Andrei Vasilevskiy · Michael Miller, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Dennis Hildeby · TheAHL, CC BY 2.0
Goalie duel
ProjectedProjected from recent starts · confirmed at puck drop
Dennis Hildeby TAM
.920 save percentage
2.01 GAA · 2–0–0 · 2 starts
Back-up expected: second night of a back-to-back
Teams do not name their goalie before the game. We expect the No. 1 unless his team played the night before, when the back-up usually starts; last season that call was right about two times in three. Our win chances do not depend on it.
Photo credits (2)
- Karel Vejmelka · Quintin Soloviev, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Dennis Hildeby · TheAHL, CC BY 2.0
Who scores
Anytime goal, overtime included
Brandon HagelTAM · LW · 7 G in 9 GP · 9 GP7533%3.04- Nick SchmaltzUTA · C · 7 G in 11 GP · 11 GP7530%3.29
Jake GuentzelTAM · C · 6 G in 9 GP · 9 GP6530%3.29- Clayton KellerUTA · RW · 4 G in 11 GP · 11 GP4523%4.33
Nikita KucherovTAM · RW · 4 G in 10 GP · 10 GP4523%4.42- Logan CooleyUTA · C · 3 G in 10 GP · 10 GP3522%4.59
Anthony CirelliTAM · C · 3 G in 8 GP · 8 GP3320%4.99- Dylan GuentherUTA · RW · 4 G in 11 GP · 11 GP4320%5.01
- Vincent TrocheckUTA · C · 3 G in 11 GP · 11 GP3319%5.25
John CarlsonTAM · D · 3 G in 9 GP · 9 GP3118%5.43
The chance that the player scores at least once, overtime included: his share of his team’s goals this season (recent games count more) times the goals we expect from his team. Tested on two NHL seasons. There is no lineup feed: a player who sits out keeps his row and counts as a miss.
Photo credits (5)
- Brandon Hagel · Jenn G, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Jake Guentzel · Michael Miller, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Nikita Kucherov · Resolute, CC BY-SA 3.0
- Anthony Cirelli · Michael Miller, CC BY-SA 4.0
- John Carlson · Michael Miller, CC BY-SA 3.0
Who will win Utah Mammoth vs Tampa Bay Lightning?
Utah Mammoth are the pick at 51% on the moneyline, with a projected 3–2 final score against Tampa Bay Lightning.
This is as tight as a matchup gets. Utah Mammoth carry a 51% win probability on home ice, and the model's most likely scoreline is 3–2. Tampa Bay Lightning actually rate slightly better once opponents are accounted for, +0.22 goals per game against an average team versus +0.20 for Utah Mammoth, a gap of just 0.02 goals. Home ice, worth about 0.25 goals a game in this league, is what tips the balance toward the home side.
Form points in different directions. Utah Mammoth have won 3 of their last 5 but have been leaky, scoring 3.8 and allowing 4.2 goals a game over that stretch. Tampa Bay Lightning have won 4 of their last 5 with a far tighter profile, scoring 4.0 and allowing 2.8. The table is level between them too: Utah Mammoth are 4th in the Western Conference and Tampa Bay Lightning are 4th in the Eastern Conference.
Inside regulation the model gives Utah Mammoth 40% to win in 60 minutes and puts a tie after three periods at 22%, which sends the game to overtime and possibly a shootout. The market reads the game the same way: once the bookmaker margin is removed, Utah Mammoth are priced at 50% on the moneyline across 2 bookmakers. With the ratings this close, the home-ice edge is doing most of the work behind the lean.
The case for Tampa Bay Lightning rests on the underlying numbers and recent defensive record, which are marginally better than Utah Mammoth's. The case for Utah Mammoth rests on playing at home in a game the model treats as close to even. Neither side has a clear structural advantage, which is why the win probability sits barely above a coin flip and the lean should be treated with care.
The projected 3–2 scoreline sits below our 6.5 total goals line, and the under is priced at 51% with 6.4 projected. On the puck line, Utah Mammoth −1.5 comes in at 29%, meaning the model expects a one-goal finish far more often than a multi-goal home win. The 3–2 projection is consistent with a tight game decided late, which is why the moneyline lean is modest rather than confident.
Utah Mammoth to win, overtime and shootout included, at 51%, with a projected score of 3–2.
Team leaders
- Points
- Goals
- Assists
- Penalty minutes
Season totals in this competition from the scoresheets so far (10 games per team); current squads only.
Photo credits (2)
- Brandon Hagel · Jenn G, CC BY-SA 4.0
- Nikita Kucherov · Resolute, CC BY-SA 3.0
Recent form
W win · OTL loss in overtime or a shootout · L loss in regulation
Head to head
No recent meetings on record.
Also scheduled
Other games that day
- · Latvian Hockey LeagueKyiv Capitals – Mogo1–5
- · KHLMagnitogorsk – Novosibirsk72%
- · SHLMalmö – Timrå64%
- · SHLIF Björklöven – Skellefteå66%
- · SHLLinköping – Örebro53%
- · Latvian Hockey LeaguePunks Vilnius – Riga Prizma55%
- · KHLNizhny Novgorod – Dinamo Minsk56%
- · LiigaIlves – Jukurit68%
- · LiigaVaasan Sport – SaiPa56%
- · LiigaTPS – Lukko56%
- · Czech ExtraligaSparta Praha – Olomouc76%
- · Latvian Hockey LeagueLiepāja – Zemgale58%





