2026-27 · Regular Season · Final

Los Angeles Lakers at Utah Jazz

Sunday, October 25, 2026 · tip-off 5:00 PM ET

LAL 2–0@UTA 1–1 records going into the game NBA.com recap ↗

Each team's share of the floor is its pregame win probability. The line starts at midcourt and moves to the split.

Team	Projected	Final	Difference
LAL Los Angeles Lakers	123	132	+9
UTA Utah Jazz (home)	117	123	+6

Forecast: Los Angeles Lakers to win, 67% win probability, projected margin 6.

Inside the Forecast

How the inputs are built

Why the model leans LAL

Home court+2.1 UTAWhat the model gives the home team on an average night.
Team strength+7.4 LALElo UTA 1328, LAL 1578; season margin UTA −8.5, LAL +2.4.
Recent form+0.8 LALLast 10 games, per 100 possessions: UTA scores 108.1 and allows 121.4; LAL scores 110.3 and allows 114.0.
Player availability+0.4 UTABoth teams close to full strength.

Together: LAL by 6, a 67% chance. Smaller inputs make up the rest; the chart below has all of them.

Team-by-team notes from the box scores

LAL is 2–0, winning by 15 a game on average (scoring 126, allowing 111). Last season they were a +1 team, which still counts for 90% of their season margin. Their offense turns it over on 16.5% of possessions (league 12.2%), which alone costs about 6 points per 100 possessions. Their defense is close to league average on all four factors.

UTA is 1–1, losing by 10 a game on average (scoring 112, allowing 121). Last season they were a −8 team, which still counts for 90% of their season margin. Their offense shoots 54% eFG against a 55% league average, which alone costs about 1.5 points per 100 possessions. Smaller factors: ball security −1.1. Their defense lets opponents shoot 59% eFG against a 55% league average, which alone costs about 6 points per 100 possessions. Smaller factors: defensive rebounding −1.0.

Written from the numbers in Built from the box scores, using only values that rebuild exactly.

How the projected margin was built

Points of home margin. Right of zero favors UTA; left favors LAL.

Baseline +2.1 plus the bars equals the projected margin −5.5. The 67% win probability comes from a separate curve on that margin. This shows how the model used its inputs, not what will decide the game. How it's calculated

Every input the model received, with its effect

Input	LAL	UTA	Effect, pts
Elo ratingMargin-of-victory Elo; 1500 is average.	1578	1328	−0.9
Elo gap, home minus road, incl. home court	−180		−5.7
Season scoring marginPoints per game, blended with last season early in the year.	+2.4	−8.5	−1.3
Games played this season	2	2	+0.4
Offensive rating, last 10Points scored per 100 possessions.	110.3	108.1	+0.3
Defensive rating, last 10Points allowed per 100 possessions; lower is better.	114.0	121.4	−1.2
Combined pace, last 10Possessions per game, both teams.	101.7		+0.1
Rotation points missingPoints per game of rotation players listed Out or Doubtful.	0.0	0.0	+0.4
Rest days	2	2	−0.0
Second night of a back-to-back	No	No	+0.0

All 21 raw inputs, in points for each team

Input	Value	UTA pts	LAL pts	Margin
Elo gap incl. home court	-179.6	−1.49	+4.21	−5.70
Defensive rating, last 10 (home)	121.4	+0.36	+2.00	−1.63
Rotation points missing (home)	0.0	+0.85	−0.20	+1.05
Elo rating (home)	1328.1	−0.12	+0.83	−0.96
Season scoring margin (home)	-8.5	−0.47	+0.35	−0.82
Rotation points missing (away)	0.0	−0.19	+0.49	−0.68
Offensive rating, last 10 (away)	110.3	−0.10	−0.68	+0.58
Defensive rating, last 10 (away)	114.0	+0.43	−0.03	+0.46
Season scoring margin (away)	2.4	−0.27	+0.16	−0.43
Games played (home)	2.0	+0.56	+0.23	+0.33
Offensive rating, last 10 (home)	108.1	−0.48	−0.19	−0.29
Home series wins	0.0	+0.25	+0.07	+0.18
Elo rating (away)	1577.7	+0.14	+0.04	+0.10
Combined pace, last 10	101.7	+3.03	+2.94	+0.09
Series pressure	0.0	+0.04	−0.01	+0.04
Games played (away)	2.0	+0.13	+0.10	+0.04
Rest days (home)	2.0	−0.00	+0.02	−0.02
Back-to-back (home)	0	+0.01	−0.01	+0.02
Rest days (away)	2.0	−0.00	+0.01	−0.01
Elimination game	0	±0.00	−0.01	+0.01
Back-to-back (away)	0	±0.00	±0.00	±0.00
Baseline (average output)		114.4	112.4	+2.10

Built from the box scores

How the breakdowns work

Where each input came from. Open a row to see the games and box-score stats behind it. A breakdown is shown only when rebuilding it from the stored stats gives exactly the number the model received.

Elo ratingLAL1578UTA13286.6 pts toward LAL

Updated after every game from the final score only: wins, losses and margin. Each season starts by keeping 75% of last season's distance from the 1500 average.

LAL1578

Ended last season at 1586 → started this one at 1564
This season's 2 games: +13.4

WGSW127–105+7.5
WLAC125–117+5.9

UTA1328

Ended last season at 1282 → started this one at 1337
This season's 2 games: −8.4

L@MEM103–123−12.8
WNOP120–119+4.4

Season scoring marginLAL+2.4UTA−8.50.9 pts toward LAL

Points scored minus points allowed per game this season, mixed with last season's margin until 20 games are played.

LAL+2.4

Scores 126.0, allows 111.0 over 2 games: +15.0 a game.

10% this season (+15.0) + 90% last season (+1.0) = +2.4

UTA−8.5

Scores 111.5, allows 121.0 over 2 games: −9.5 a game.

10% this season (−9.5) + 90% last season (−8.4) = −8.5

Offensive rating, last 10LAL110.3UTA108.10.3 pts toward UTA

Points scored per 100 possessions. Split into the four factors: right of center helps the team, left hurts, in points per 100 possessions compared with the league average (2025-26: 114.6).

LAL110.3scored, −4.3 vs league

Factor	LAL	League	Pts
Shooting (eFG%)	55.1%	54.5%	+0.8
Turnovers (TOV%)	16.5%	12.2%	−6.2
Offensive rebounding (OREB%)	27.7%	26.1%	+0.7
Free throws (FTM per FGA)	0.241	0.210	+0.9
Everything else			−0.6

UTA108.1scored, −6.5 vs league

Factor	UTA	League	Pts
Shooting (eFG%)	53.5%	54.5%	−1.5
Turnovers (TOV%)	12.9%	12.2%	−1.1
Offensive rebounding (OREB%)	25.5%	26.1%	−0.2
Free throws (FTM per FGA)	0.180	0.210	−0.9
Everything else			−2.8

Defensive rating, last 10LAL114.0UTA121.41.2 pts toward LAL

Points allowed per 100 possessions, built from what opponents did in those games. Bars point right when the defense held opponents below average. Split into the four factors: right of center helps the team, left hurts, in points per 100 possessions compared with the league average (2025-26: 114.6).

LAL114.0allowed, −0.6 vs league

Factor	Opponents	League	Pts
Shooting (eFG%)	54.4%	54.5%	+0.3
Turnovers (TOV%)	12.3%	12.2%	+0.2
Offensive rebounding (OREB%)	26.1%	26.1%	−0.0
Free throws (FTM per FGA)	0.213	0.210	−0.1
Everything else			+0.3

UTA121.4allowed, +6.8 vs league

Factor	Opponents	League	Pts
Shooting (eFG%)	58.5%	54.5%	−6.1
Turnovers (TOV%)	11.6%	12.2%	−0.8
Offensive rebounding (OREB%)	28.3%	26.1%	−1.0
Free throws (FTM per FGA)	0.197	0.210	+0.4
Everything else			+0.8

Pace, last 10average 101.70.1 pts toward UTA

Possessions per 48 minutes. The model uses the average of the two teams. Faster games mean more points for both sides, so pace mostly moves the projected total, not the margin.

LAL 95.6 and UTA 107.8 → average 101.7 (league 2025-26: 100.0)

Rotation points missingLAL0.0UTA0.00.4 pts toward UTA

Points per game of rotation players (two or more of the last 10 games this season, 15+ minutes) listed Out or Doubtful on the official injury report.

LAL0.0pts/g missing

Every rotation player was available.

Source: official injury report, 2026-10-25 17:30 ET. 7 rotation players.

UTA0.0pts/g missing

Every rotation player was available.

Source: official injury report, 2026-10-25 17:30 ET. 8 rotation players.

RestLAL2 daysUTA2 daysno effect on the margin

Days since the team's previous game, capped at 5. One day means the second night of a back-to-back.

LAL2days

Last played Oct 23 against LAC.

UTA2days

Last played Oct 23 against NOP.

The last 10 games behind these numbers, box-score totals

LAL

Date	Opp	Score	FG	3P	FT	TOV	OREB	Off	Def	Pace
Oct 23	LAC	125–117	46-79	14-32	19-25	21	8	122.5	113.6	102.5
Oct 21	GSW	127–105	46-81	11-28	24-27	18	10	124.5	102.9	102.0
May 11	OKC	110–115	38-75	10-28	24-27	19	7	112.2	117.3	98.0
May 9	OKC	108–131	38-81	14-30	18-25	16	14	117.4	140.9	92.5
May 7	@OKC	107–125	39-78	11-29	18-21	20	10	111.5	127.6	97.0
May 5	@OKC	90–108	35-85	10-30	10-13	17	12	95.7	116.1	93.5
May 1	@HOU	98–78	36-89	12-28	14-24	10	15	106.5	83.9	92.5
Apr 29	HOU	93–99	32-76	7-27	22-27	15	13	103.3	110.0	90.0
Apr 26	@HOU	96–115	37-74	5-22	17-21	23	10	103.2	122.3	93.5
Apr 24	@HOU	112–108	38-79	12-29	24-32	20	9	105.7	104.9	94.6

UTA

Date	Opp	Score	FG	3P	FT	TOV	OREB	Off	Def	Pace
Oct 23	NOP	120–119	41-84	13-35	25-33	18	14	117.6	116.7	102.0
Oct 21	@MEM	103–123	35-75	11-32	22-33	18	5	99.0	118.3	104.0
Apr 12	@LAL	107–131	41-94	7-34	18-27	16	14	101.9	123.6	105.5
Apr 10	MEM	147–101	62-110	15-35	8-17	16	8	121.5	83.5	121.0
Apr 7	@NOP	137–156	53-104	10-32	21-24	16	7	112.3	127.9	122.0
Apr 5	@OKC	111–146	43-100	14-39	11-15	16	14	101.8	136.4	108.0
Apr 3	@HOU	106–140	43-96	5-27	15-22	13	17	102.9	138.6	102.0
Apr 1	DEN	117–130	44-95	12-37	17-25	12	10	109.3	121.5	107.0
Mar 30	CLE	113–122	42-88	15-29	14-20	15	8	110.8	119.6	102.0
Mar 28	@PHX	109–134	43-92	10-23	13-19	14	10	103.8	127.6	105.0

Off and Def are points scored and allowed per 100 possessions in each game; their averages are the 10-game ratings above. OREB is missing (–) where the source data didn't record it.

The result against the forecast

2026-27 surprise games

67%

pregame chance the forecast gave LAL, the winner

LAL was the forecast favorite

3 pts

margin miss

forecast −6, actual −9 for UTA

97th

most surprising result of 2026-27

of 146 graded games so far

116th

largest margin miss of 2026-27

outcome surprise 0.40 nats

Surprise is measured against this model's forecast, not against what other observers expected. Outcome surprise is −ln(winner's pregame probability): 0.69 for a coin flip, 2.3 for a 10% winner.

Team box score

What happened in the game. These numbers are not used by the forecast, and they are not offered as the reason it missed.

Team stat	LAL	UTA
Final score	132	123
Field goals	40–82 · 48.8%	46–95 · 48.4%
Three-pointers	20–47 · 42.6%	10–35 · 28.6%
Free throws	32–38 · 84.2%	21–27 · 77.8%
Rebounds	31	52
Assists	19	29
Turnovers	10	17
Steals	9	6
Blocks	6	2

How the model does with these teams over time: Los Angeles Lakers · Utah Jazz

Where the forecast differed from the result

Measure	Forecast	Actual	Actual − forecast
Home margin (UTA)	−6	−9	−3
Total points	240	255	+15
LAL points	123	132	+9
UTA points	117	123	+6

Recent form before this game