Empty net goal scoring is out of control

[TheStatican]

Last season, I created a thread discussing the increased prominence of empty-net scoring and its underappreciated effect on the scoring rates of the league’s top players (along with 3-on-3 OT);

Empty Net & Overtime Scoring: Their Effects on Scoring Distribution and the Resulting Inflation of Point Totals for the League's Top Players

Empty net scoring has seen a huge uptick in recent seasons, largely thanks to analytics revealing that playing with an empty net is actually of a net benefit for a team aiming to make a comeback. Goals conceded during these situations are now considered to be largely inconsequential; after all...

forums.hfboards.com

This season, I’ve noticed that many games have featured multiple empty-net goals, and it seems as though their overall frequency continues to rise. So, I checked the numbers and sure enough the stats corroborate this observation. Empty-net goals are up a whopping 34% this year compared to last season, which was already at near record-setting levels. We’ve now reached a point where over 10% of all NHL goals (127 of 1173=10.8%) are being scored in these situations, either playing against(83) and with(44) an empty net;

For comparison purposes, powerplay scoring represents just over 20% of all NHL goals while OT and shorthanded scoring each account for 2.6%(30 each) Yes, that's right, the number of goals scored in empty net situations is now more than half of the total number of powerplay goals scored so far this season(238).

Seasons​	​	PPG/Gm​	ENG/Gm​	6v5G/Gm​	ENG % of all G​	6v5 % of all G​	For & Against ENG​	PP % of all G​
1963 to 1967​	O6 sample​	1.29​	0.06​	​	1.0%​	0.5%*​	1.5%​	22.2%​
1967 to 1979​	Post O6 Expansion​	1.39​	0.09​	​	1.4%​	0.7%*​	2.1%​	21.5%​
1979 to 1994​	Post WHL Expansion​	1.89​	0.14​	​	1.9%​	0.9%*​	2.7%​	25.6%​
1994 to 2014​	Post '94 lockout​	1.45​	0.17​	​	3.0%​	1.5%*​	4.5%​	26.2%​
2014 to 2018​	surge in EN scoring​	1.17​	0.26​	0.11​	4.7%​	2.1%​	6.7%​	21.3%​
2018 to 2024​	subtle increase​	1.21​	0.33​	0.14​	5.4%​	2.3%​	7.6%​	19.9%​
This season​	second surge​	1.29​	0.45​	0.24​	7.1%​	3.8%​	10.8%​	20.4%​

* denotes estimates - 6v5 numbers are not available prior to the 1999-00 season the estimate is based off a rate of 0.5 6v5 goals per ENG. The numbers since 1999-00 are accurate and taken from naturalstattrick

Yearly change in goals per game, all higher scoring situations.
Higher scoring 3v3 OT was introduced in 15-16;

Empty net scoring is becoming the new and improved 'power play,' - scoring rates and playing with an empty net are higher than powerplay scoring rates and scoring rates playing against an empty net are 3 times as high! If I did the math right, teams have only played a total of about 2.7% of all regulation game time with a goalie pulled and yet teams have scored 11.1% of their regulation goals in during this time(127 of 1173 -28 OT goals). This shift is leading to a scoring bonanza and part of the reason why scoring rates are currently at their highest level in over 30 years. The question is: should the NHL be concerned about this trend, or is it a positive development for the league?

For the record, I’m not arguing for or against it, the alarming thread title was just to get you 'in the door.' I simply want to highlight this trend and its potential implications when comparing players across different eras.

Click to read more...

 

[Reality Czech]

Crazy, but it makes sense. A lot of players can really pad their stats via the ENG.

 

[alko]

What would Brett Hull do with that?

 

[SoundAndFury]

Most teams are pulling goalies with around 2 minutes left nowadays because analytics told that's the way if you want to change something. Naturally, if you are going to play with an empty net twice as long, opponents will score into it many more times. Not to mention that last minutes used to be given to "shutdown lines" to handle on the defensive side of things who would just get the puck out of the zone and change, shooting at an empty net was almost taboo. While now we often see top guys on the ice whose primary focus is to get that empty netter which ends the game.

 

[Coffee]

@alko said it best

What would Hull do?

 

[JoVel]

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

 

[TheStatican]

@alko said it best

What would Hull do?

Nothing. Brian Sutter would come out of coaching retirement and staple his ass to the bench.

 

[Coffee]

Nothing. Brian Sutter would come out of coaching retirement and staple his ass to the bench.

What would Datsyuk do

 

[TheStatican]

What would Datsyuk do

Would have to look more deeply into his late game performance and usage, but my current guess would be score approx. 50% more points

 

[Beukeboom]

Al Iafrate does not approve...

 

[ijuka]

Let me put it this way.

If you're trailing by one but don't pull the goalie for the last 2 minutes, your chances of scoring might be 10%, same with the opponent's, with 80% of no goal. So 80% you lose by 1, 10% you lose by 2, 10% you tie the game.

But if you do pull the goalie for the last 2 min, it might look something more like: your chances of scoring 20%, opponent chances of scoring 60%, chances of no goal 20%. So 20% you lose by 1, 60% you lose by 2, 20% you tie the game.

It's unimportant whether you lose by 1 goal or 2 goals. But having twice the chance of tying the game in the final 2 minutes should be worth the risk of getting a goal scored against you, because if the status quo is maintained, you lose.

Of course, it's not quite this simple, because if you pull the goalie at 2min left and the opponent scores an empty netter against you at 1:40, then for these last 1:40, your chances of tying the game will probably be lower than it would have if you never pulled the goalie. It gets pretty complicated, but even then, pulling the goalie relatively early should be correct.

 

[DFC]

I'll bet it correlates exactly to how much earlier teams pull goalies these days.