Utah Mammoth
Central Division, Western Conference
Current Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PTS | GF | GA | DIFF | PTS % | Last 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 76 | 40 | 30 | 6 | 86 | 248 | 218 | +30 | 56.6% |
|
Playoff Probabilities
Based on 100,000 simulations run on Apr 07, 2026
Likely First-Round Opponents
| Opponent | Probability | Likelihood |
|---|---|---|
Edmonton Oilers
|
41.8% | |
Anaheim Ducks
|
29.2% | |
Vegas Golden Knights
|
20.6% | |
Colorado Avalanche
|
5.8% |
Probabilities sum to 98.3% (= playoff probability). Remaining 1.7% = miss playoffs.
Analysis
Summary
The Utah Mammoth are in strong playoff position with a 94.7% chance of qualifying, though that mark dipped 6.5% after recent results tightened the race. Sitting at 82 points with eight games left, Utah controls its destiny and is projected to finish comfortably above the cutline.
Record and Recent Performance
At 38-30-6 through 74 games, Utah’s 82 points translate to a 55.4% points percentage, solidly playoff caliber in the Western Conference. Their +23 goal differential (235 goals for, 212 against) supports the legitimacy of that record, and their 53.2% team strength rating aligns with a mid-tier playoff team rather than a fringe qualifier. However, recent form sits at just 45.0%, which helps explain the slight drop in playoff probability and serves as a warning that they can’t coast home. They’ve been notably better at home (56.8% strength) than on the road (51.8%), a meaningful factor given their remaining schedule.
The Competition
Anaheim (86 points) and Edmonton (83) are essentially out of reach for Utah in terms of moving up, with the Ducks projected for 97.2 points and the Oilers for 92.6, leaving the Mammoth likely locked into the second wild-card range. The real pressure comes from behind: Vegas sits two points back at 80 with a 76.3% playoff probability, while Nashville (77), Los Angeles (76), and Seattle (75) are clustered around the projected cutline of 86.1 points. Utah’s projection of 91.6 points gives them a cushion of roughly five points over that line, meaning one strong week could slam the door, but a prolonged slump would quickly bring multiple teams into striking distance.
Remaining Schedule
Utah’s final eight games lean home-heavy (five at home, three on the road), which plays to their strengths. The average opponent strength of 49.2% is below the league average of 53.1%, making this a relatively favorable stretch despite being labeled “average” overall in difficulty. The Mammoth are projected to earn 9.6 more points, which would bring them to 91 or 92 total—comfortably clear of the 86.1-point projected cutoff. Realistically, five wins or four wins plus a couple of overtime losses should be enough to secure their spot without needing help.
Outlook
Barring a collapse, Utah is headed to the postseason for the first time under the Mammoth identity, though likely as a wild-card team without a path to the division title. Their playoff odds north of 94% reflect both their current cushion and a manageable schedule, but the recent dip in form is the one red flag. Take care of business at home, hit the projected 91–92 point range, and Utah will be preparing for a tough first-round matchup rather than scoreboard-watching in mid-April.
Bandwagon Case
Why you should jump on the bandwagon:
Utah is easy to get behind because they’re both competitive now and still clearly building toward something bigger. Clayton Keller remains the engine — a dynamic winger who drives play and can take over stretches with his puck skill — and Logan Cooley gives them legit game-breaking speed down the middle. Dylan Guenther’s finishing ability adds another layer, and the addition of Mikhail Sergachev on the back end has given them a true minute-munching defenseman who can move the puck and steady things late in games. In net, Connor Ingram has been calm and reliable, which matters for a team that doesn’t always play low-event hockey.
There’s also something compelling about the timing. This is a relocated franchise carving out an identity in a new market, and they’re doing it with a young core that feels like it’s arriving ahead of schedule. They’re not leaning on fading stars — they’re growing into contention, and that makes every playoff game feel like part of a longer story.
On the ice, Utah plays with pace. They’re comfortable trading chances because their skill can tilt the ice quickly, but the +24 goal differential shows they’re not just run-and-gun. When they’re on, the transition game is sharp, the power play can hum, and their top six can overwhelm teams in waves. If you’re looking for a team that’s good now, still ascending, and genuinely fun to watch, this is a pretty easy wagon to hop on.
Required Win Percentage for Playoffs
Win percentage needed in remaining games to achieve each playoff probability threshold. A checkmark (✓) means the team has mathematically clinched a playoff spot. A dash (—) means the threshold is impossible to reach.
Playoff Probability Breakdown
Understanding the factors that drive the 98.3% playoff probability
📊 Schedule Context
🎯 Key Factors
🏒 Playoff Picture
Playoff probabilities are calculated through Monte Carlo simulation, running 10,000+ scenarios of the remaining season. Each game is simulated based on team strength ratings, home ice advantage (~55% win rate), and opponent matchups.
Points Distribution vs. Cutline
Projected to finish with 92–95 points (middle 50%). The playoff cutline is typically 88–90 points. Finishes above the cutline in 98.5% of simulations.
Team Projection
Playoff Cutline
Playoff Race — Western Conference
| # | Team | PTS | GP | Left | STR | L10 | SOS | Proj PTS | Playoff % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 87 | 77 | 5 | 56.7% | 70.0% | 50.5% | 92.8 | 98.4% | |
| 5 | 87 | 77 | 5 | 50.6% | 50.0% | 48.3% | 92.8 | 96.7% | |
| 6 | 86 | 76 | 6 | 57.2% | 60.0% | 53.6% | 93.1 | 98.3% | |
| 7 | 86 | 77 | 5 | 52.5% | 50.0% | 47.1% | 92.0 | 96.2% | |
| 8 | 81 | 76 | 6 | 52.7% | 70.0% | 52.4% | 87.9 | 44.3% | |
| 9 | 81 | 76 | 6 | 50.1% | 60.0% | 43.3% | 88.1 | 36.7% | |
| 10 | 79 | 75 | 7 | 46.2% | 45.0% | 46.1% | 86.7 | 22.6% | |
| 11 | 78 | 76 | 6 | 50.7% | 70.0% | 55.9% | 84.7 | 5.6% | |
| 12 | 78 | 76 | 6 | 50.5% | 60.0% | 52.6% | 83.5 | 1.1% | |
Team Strength Metrics
| Overall Strength | Home Strength | Away Strength | Pythagorean Win % | Recent Form |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 57.2% | 59.8% | 56.8% | 56.4% | 60.0% |
Player Statistics
| # | Player | Pos | GP | G | A | PTS | +/- | SOG | HIT | BLK | TOI | Performance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | Clayton Keller | R | 76 | 25 | 53 | 78 | +22 | 0 | 8 | 30 | 19:00 | |
| 11 | Dylan Guenther | R | 74 | 37 | 30 | 67 | +7 | 0 | 60 | 27 | 17:20 | |
| 8 | Nick Schmaltz | C | 76 | 28 | 39 | 67 | +19 | 0 | 21 | 47 | 19:41 | |
| 98 | Mikhail Sergachev | D | 72 | 10 | 44 | 54 | +2 | 0 | 36 | 120 | 24:18 | |
| 77 | JJ Peterka | R | 76 | 23 | 21 | 44 | +8 | 0 | 15 | 18 | 15:59 | |
| 67 | Lawson Crouse | L | 75 | 21 | 19 | 40 | +22 | 0 | 198 | 50 | 16:27 | |
| 92 | Logan Cooley | C | 48 | 22 | 16 | 38 | +6 | 0 | 49 | 23 | 17:15 | |
| 6 | John Marino | D | 76 | 4 | 30 | 34 | +39 | 0 | 27 | 66 | 20:16 | |
| 53 | Michael Carcone | L | 73 | 15 | 13 | 28 | +3 | 0 | 138 | 16 | 12:34 | |
| 27 | Barrett Hayton | C | 67 | 11 | 15 | 26 | +3 | 0 | 34 | 29 | 15:07 | |
| 22 | Jack McBain | C | 75 | 9 | 16 | 25 | +11 | 0 | 271 | 43 | 13:50 | |
| 50 | Sean Durzi | D | 55 | 5 | 20 | 25 | -13 | 0 | 37 | 82 | 19:38 | |
| 28 | Ian Cole | D | 76 | 3 | 19 | 22 | +17 | 0 | 70 | 143 | 18:15 | |
| 56 | Kailer Yamamoto | R | 53 | 11 | 10 | 21 | +13 | 0 | 38 | 17 | 11:39 | |
| 88 | Nate Schmidt | D | 76 | 5 | 16 | 21 | +31 | 0 | 76 | 91 | 19:51 | |
| 82 | Kevin Stenlund | C | 74 | 4 | 14 | 18 | -8 | 0 | 39 | 59 | 14:32 | |
| 15 | Alexander Kerfoot | C | 28 | 5 | 5 | 10 | -2 | 0 | 25 | 23 | 12:06 | |
| 57 | Nick DeSimone | D | 38 | 2 | 6 | 8 | +6 | 0 | 17 | 29 | 14:26 | |
| 19 | Daniil But | L | 29 | 3 | 3 | 6 | +1 | 0 | 16 | 18 | 12:28 | |
| 38 | Liam O'Brien | C | 33 | 3 | 1 | 4 | -5 | 0 | 99 | 12 | 9:03 | |
| 52 | MacKenzie Weegar ← CGY | D | 13 | 1 | 3 | 4 | +3 | 0 | 27 | 21 | 20:52 | |
| 13 | Brandon Tanev | L | 50 | 0 | 3 | 3 | -15 | 0 | 135 | 32 | 9:22 | |
| 3 | Olli Määttä → CGY | D | 22 | 0 | 1 | 1 | -5 | 0 | 1 | 17 | 12:10 | |
| 26 | Dmitri Simashev | D | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12:30 |
Recent Games (Last 10)
| Date | Opponent | Location | Score | Result | Opp Strength | Playoff Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 04 | Vancouver Canucks | Away | 4 - 7 | W | 30.1% | +1.5% |
| Apr 02 | Seattle Kraken | Away | 2 - 6 | W | 43.0% | +3.6% |
| Mar 28 | Los Angeles Kings | Away | 2 - 6 | W | 50.1% | +5.6% |
| Mar 26 | Washington Capitals | Home | 4 - 7 | L | 55.6% | -2.8% |
| Mar 24 | Edmonton Oilers | Home | 2 - 5 | L | 56.7% | -1.2% |
| Mar 22 | Los Angeles Kings | Home | 4 - 3 (OT) | W | 50.1% | +2.4% |
| Mar 20 | Anaheim Ducks | Home | 1 - 4 | L | 50.6% | -2.1% |
| Mar 19 | Vegas Golden Knights | Away | 0 - 4 | W | 52.5% | +2.9% |
| Mar 16 | Dallas Stars | Away | 3 - 6 | W | 57.8% | +5.3% |
| Mar 14 | Pittsburgh Penguins | Home | 3 - 4 | L | 58.3% | -3.0% |
Upcoming Games
| Date | Opponent | Location | Opp Strength | Exp Pts | Playoff Swing | Predicted Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 07, 21:30 | vs Edmonton Oilers | Home | 56.7% | 1.18 | 2.7% | UTA (53%) |
| Apr 09, 21:00 | vs Nashville Predators | Home | 52.7% | 1.21 | 3.2% | UTA (55%) |
| Apr 11, 17:00 | vs Carolina Hurricanes | Home | 63.9% | 1.13 | 2.6% | UTA (51%) |
| Apr 12, 21:00 | @ Calgary Flames | Away | 47.3% | 1.10 | - | CGY (51%) |
| Apr 14, 21:00 | vs Winnipeg Jets | Home | 50.5% | 1.22 | - | UTA (56%) |
| Apr 16, 20:00 | vs St. Louis Blues | Home | 50.7% | 1.24 | - | UTA (57%) |
| Averages (Next 6 games): | 7.1 pts | 2.8% | ||||
Expected points are calculated based on win probabilities: (2 × win%) + (0.25 × loss%) for overtime losses. Opponent strength ratings help identify which games are easier or harder opportunities to earn points.