Empty net goal scoring is getting out of control

[NVious]

Empty net with a dman>>>>>>>>>80s goalies

 

[Ceremony]

Has the amount of goals scored with an extra attacker increased as well?

 

[MoneyManny]

Unpopular opinion: ENG shouldn't have any more value to a player's stat sheet than shootout goals.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Has the amount of goals scored with an extra attacker increased as well?

OP provided that data - 2.1% of all goals scored from 2014-2018 and so far this season it's 3.8% of all goals scored.

Although it's possible with only 13% of the season played, this could be just a sample size thing where it corrects.

 

[ThatGuy22]

I'm Filip Gustafson and I approve this message.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Actually, goal differential is the tie breaker when it comes to determining position in the standings and can be the difference between getting into the playoffs or not.

An interesting stat would be to look at teams who missed the playoffs due to goal differential vs. the number of empty net goals those teams allowed.

Edit:
I'll go a step further and say that if your team is allowing excess empty net goals at this point in the season, they do not expect to make the playoffs.

That stat would be less than the points aquired, when pulling the goalie.
You need the points to even get to a tiebreaker rule.

Not to mention goal differential is the 6th tie breaker, so likely doesn’t even get to that.

 

[benfranklin]

I think it's a positive thing because it makes gamblers mad and my favorite player likes to score empty netters.

One of the main reasons he lost the Hart though...

 

[coooldude]

Players seem more apt to shoot from a potential icing position too than ever before. I remember that was a cardinal sin when I played structured hockey, icing while going for an empty net. I think the mindset around this has changed too.

On one of the Sharks broadcasts, it was mentioned that the analytics are in favor of shooting for the EN rather than avoiding icings. In the same way the team pulling the goalie is being more aggressive and doing it earlier and earlier, so too are the defending teams taking the long shots to end the game more aggressively.

This is reflected similarly in football -- more teams going for 2 when down by 14, more teams going for it aggressively on 4th down, i believe (but not 100% sure) more teams blitzing in high danger situations to counteract this. We may see a swing back to more conservative goalie pulling if the defense is much more effective than previous by being more aggressive going for the EN with their skill players on ice. But for now, I think it personally makes for exciting hockey, so long as all the various advanced stats try to adjust for EN goal differential.

 

[TheStatican]

Do you have a solution to this other than making it illegal to remove the goalie in any circumstance?

Taken to it's natural conclusion and if the scoring ratios remain the same teams will continue to push the boundaries of how early they pull goalies. Whereas before 1 minute was the norm and seeing how 2 minutes has now become the new norm - eventually 3, 4 or even 5+ minutes will become the future norm once it's become 'acceptable'. I think the only solution would be to place a cap or limit on either exactly when teams can pull a goalie or for how long they can. The latter solution would being more idea because the former would curtail situations where team pull a goalie during a delayed penalty, but the latter option would make things more complicated because then the ref would have to watch teams for that and you might also have to have rules in place for when the limit can be reset.

This is nothing new, when Pavel Bure scored his 60 goal season 10 of them were into an empty net and no one cried about his numbers being skewed.

Because that was in a way an anomaly, even if he was gunning for it. But we're getting to the point where you'll soon see 5 or 10 players scoring 10 or more ENG's per year.

I'm curious whether the percentage of games going to overtime is down this year so far. Seems like it to me.

Good question. It would take a while to go through the historical numbers but compared to years last season there has been a slight decrease of -6.5% in the number of games going into OT, though the number of ENG's are up far more at +34%. This year 19.5% 36 of 185 games have gone to OT (30 OT wins/loses, 6 SO's) vs last years rate of 20.7%, 272 of 1312 games going to OT(190 OT wins/loses and 82 SO's). For some reason a lot more games are ending in OT than going into shootouts though - the rate for which has dropped by almost 50%!

 

[coooldude]

Taken to it's natural conclusion and if the scoring ratios remain the same teams will continue to push the boundaries of how early they pull goalies. Whereas before 1 minute was the norm and now 2 minutes has become acceptable - eventual 3, 4 or even 5 minutes will become the new norm. I think the only solution would be to place a cap or limit on either exactly when teams can pull a goalie or for how long they can. The latter solution would being more idea because the former would curtail situations where team pull a goalie during a delayed penalty, but then that would make things more complicated because now the ref would have to watch teams for that and you might also have to have rules in place for when that limit 'resets'.

Not necessarily. It depends on whether pulling the goalie for 3+ minutes will lead to more wins and points. At some point there's too much risk to conceding a goal. Just like how in football, even though teams are going for it more on 4th down, it's not inevitable that there are never any punts, because sometimes you get punished badly for going for it on 4th down too aggressively.

If the defending teams keep taking more icing risks with their top line skill players out there and EN goals against start to become more likely, that changes the probabilities on how early you should pull your goalie. We'll probably see an equilibrium not far off historical values, is my guess... 2-3 minutes if down by 2, ~2 minutes with clear puck possession if down by 1.

 

[Toby91ca]

An interesting stat would be to look at teams who missed the playoffs due to goal differential vs. the number of empty net goals those teams allowed.

I don't think it would be that interesting as the data you'd have to look at wouldn't exist. It's never happened in the history of the game.

Teams missed the playoffs due to tiebreaker 9 times in league history, only 4 times in the last 50 years, only once in the last 37 years. Of those 9 times, wins was the tiebreaker 7 times, 1 time was head to head record and 1 time was total goals. The total goal tie-breaker was in 1970. Not 100% sure what the tie-breaker rules were back then, but Montreal lost out by scoring 2 less goals than the Rangers....goal differential wasn't considered, but if it was, Montreal gave up more goals than the Rangers as well....so even further separation.

 

[Patrik26]

“I’m Nikita Kucherov and I approve this message.”

 

[Toby91ca]

Because that was in a way an anomaly, even if he was gunning for it. But we're getting to the point where you'll soon see 5 or 10 players scoring 10 or more ENG's per year.

Maybe, can't say it's impossible, but no single player has EVER scored 10 ENG in a single season.....we're now going to start seeing 5-10 guys do it every year?

This is nothing new, when Pavel Bure scored his 60 goal season 10 of them were into an empty net and no one cried about his numbers being skewed.

9 were empty netters.

 

[ijuka]

Sure, that makes a lot of sense analytically and there’s little doubt pulling the goalie earlier statistically improves a team’s chances of winning. But is it good for the integrity of the sport I wonder?

When the strategy of pulling the goalie first emerged it was clearly meant to be a rarely seen, last-resort gamble rather than a go-to tactic with significant time left. As teams increasingly adopt the approach and analytics push them to pull goalies earlier and earlier - along with potentially other future unorthodox tactics, it could start to feel like an artificial, almost 'gimmicky' aspect of play, much like how many still feel about 3-on-3 overtime and shootouts. Though at least those game time situations while inelegant, were designed to address a legitimate longstanding issue(ties).

If teams routinely pull their goalies earlier it risks detracting from the traditional flow of the game imo. At what point does the game’s authenticity feel compromised just for the sake of 'playing the odds'? Would fans really be fine with situations like Game 5 of the 2023 Finals between Florida and Vegas becoming the norm? Or teams scoring as much as say a quarter of their goals without ever having to beat a goalie?

I'm not sure what you mean with this. How is taking a risk and desperately trying to tie the game while accepting an objective disadvantage a gimmick? I think that it makes for a much more exciting finish than if the team does not pull a goalie early.

And comparing it to 3on3 overtime is pretty forced.

As for ENGs diluting the value of a goal, that's simple. Just don't count ENGs when counting player goals, have those as extra stats. Have the main stat as something like "goals scored against a goaltender."

 

[The Hockey Tonk Man]

Feel like the Bruins spend the whole time 6 vs 5 in their own end. Don't think they help the empty net stat.

 

[Breakers]

Somebody created a thread a couple years ago about a Svechnikov empty net goal, and how it should be in consideration for goal of the year

 

[SoundwaveIsCharisma]

I think the Avs are just trying to set a new ENGA record this season. Already at 9

 

[pitseleh]

Great analysis. What I find most interesting is that this suggests that ~40% of the increase in scoring between 2018 and 2024 compared to the dead puck era (let’s say the six years before the (‘04 lockout) is from ENG. Add in OT goals and you probably have closer to half the difference.

GF/g are not up as much this season as ENG goals/game are up, so will be interesting to see if they continue to mask a bit of a drop in offence.

 

[Brookbank]

A new merchant is born. So who are the ENG merchants ?

In all seriousness, it doesn't matter. Pulling the goalie is a glorious part of hockey. I remember watching with a non hockey fan and they just thought pulling the goalie was the coolest thing.

 

[x Tame Impala]

It should be a separate stat category and not count in player’s career stats or in the scoring race.

A 3-2 game easily finishes with a 5-2 score and it’s just kinda dumb to count that

 

[SnowblindNYR]

This is probably due to:

1) Goalies are getting pulled earlier

2) Goalies are getting pulled even after the team gives up an empty net goal. This used to happen rarely although it did happen.

3) Goalies are getting pulled down 3. 2 used to be cutoff most of the time unless it was an elimination game or something.

I would love to see if this has resulted in more games getting tied or not.

 

[TheStatican]

I'm not sure what you mean with this. How is taking a risk and desperately trying to tie the game while accepting an objective disadvantage a gimmick? I think that it makes for a much more exciting finish than if the team does not pull a goalie early.

And comparing it to 3on3 overtime is pretty forced.

You're right; 'gimmicky' was not be the best word to describe it since it is making use of a move that has existed for a long time. But it reminds me of how baseball managers were increasingly making use of the defensive shift, which gradually altered the nature of the game. It wasn’t a huge change initially, but over time, it had changed the game to such a degree that the league eventually decided to implement rules to limit defensive shifts. Playing with an empty net for extended periods of time feels similar in that it shifts hockey away from its originally intended structure. Would you agree or disagree that prolonged empty-net play time isn’t quite how hockey was meant to be played? Maybe a couple minutes of EN game time isn't cause for any kind of alarm just yet but the trend is increasing that much is very clear.

As for ENGs diluting the value of a goal, that's simple. Just don't count ENGs when counting player goals, have those as extra stats. Have the main stat as something like "goals scored against a goaltender."

That makes sense to me and it would be easy enough to be track and list those totals. But will there be a consensus about which stat counts for the Art Ross? Unlikely. They'll be strong views on either side of that argument.

 

[Regal]

That makes sense to me and it would be easy enough to be track and list those totals. But will there be a consensus about which stat counts for the Art Ross? Unlikely. They'll be strong views on either side of that argument.

I don’t know why they got rid of it on the regular stats page. I remember it used to always be in the old newspaper stats

 

[MadLuke]

If teams routinely pull their goalies earlier it risks detracting from the traditional flow of the game imo. At what point does the game’s authenticity feel compromised just for the sake of 'playing the odds'? Would fans really be fine with situations like Game 5 of the 2023 Finals between Florida and Vegas becoming the norm? Or teams scoring as much as say a quarter of their goals without ever having to beat a goalie?

For sure, but is it a bad thing for the last minutes of a game to be on a different flow than the rest of it, that something that happen in some sports and it feel anti-dramatic, say in soccer when the last "2 minutes"/ we never know how much of team that behind by just a goal feel like normal play almost.

Football do it explicitly with the 2 minutes warning and a lot of timeout that make the last 3-4 minutes of a game quite different than traditional flow of the game, going for 4th and long as well.

Basketball maybe take it too far, at the peak the last 2 minutes could take 15 real life minutes and was like all that mattered and completely different from the rest of the game.

One big issue of removing the goaltender really early is that it add the chance that the last minute is less dramatic because the issues is known earlier.

 

[the valiant effort]

Goals scored when the goalie “had no chance” are henceforth removed from goal tallies.