Lead changes in game 7 of the SCF

[Hockey2Hockey]

In 1987, the Flyers led 1-0. Edmonton scored three unanswered goals to win the cup.

There have been nine SCF game 7's since.

94,01,03,04,06,09,11,19,24

The team scoring first has won all nine games. Not only that, but the only time a trailing team tied it (1-1) was Edmonton last year.

Is this an anomaly. Or do you think the team trailing tightens their sticks and gets spooked out?

That's just such a crazy stat.

 

[Michael Farkas]

It's easier to destroy than it is to create.

 

[jigglysquishy]

It's easier to destroy than it is to create.

Toddler in the Living Room Theory

 

[Staniowski]

Obviously the team that scores first is going to win the large majority of hockey games. That would always be the case.

The later in the game the first goal is scored, the greater chance the scoring team will win.

And in lower scoring hockey, and better defensive hockey, I assume the even better likelihood the first scorer will be the winner.

 

[LightningStorm]

Interesting trivia here. I do think this is a big reason why there has never been a real memorable epic game 7 in the 4 round era. The last stat you mentioned of 2024 being the only time the losing team at least subsequently tied it is something I find even more crazy.

Now that I think of it, 94, 04, 06, & 09 all have similar patters. Team jumps out to a 2-0 lead and manages to hold off their opponent. 94 involved 2-1 and 3-1 leads before a 3-2 win, while 04 & 09 were essentially the same of limiting the opponent to a single goal and hanging onto a 2-1 win. 06 felt like a 1 goal game since it was an empty net with a minute left to go up 3-1.

 

[Hockey2Hockey]

Obviously the team that scores first is going to win the large majority of hockey games. That would always be the case.

The later in the game the first goal is scored, the greater chance the scoring team will win.

And in lower scoring hockey, and better defensive hockey, I assume the even better likelihood the first scorer will be the winner.

Of course.

But nine times in a row. Eight of those times the trailing team never even tied it?

 

[The Panther]

I'm more weirded-out by how many times the Canadian franchise has lost in the Final since 1994... especially in how many lost game 7.

 

[Staniowski]

Of course.

But nine times in a row. Eight of those times the trailing team never even tied it?

It might be just slightly out of the ordinary, but I don't find it anything close to shocking.

The first scorer already wins 70% of the time, or whatever the number is. Add in tighter defense, which ramps the percentage up some more...

I remember the '95 playoffs...it was a joke at the time, that as soon as the Devils scored the first goal, the game was over, the Devils would increase the D as soon as they got the lead.

 

[GlitchMarner]

I'm more weirded-out by how many times the Canadian franchise has lost in the Final since 1994... especially in how many lost game 7.

I think VAN ('11) is the only one that had home ice advantage and was really the only favorite.

 

[vikash1987]

Out of curiosity, why is 1987 the starting point? If you go back to 1971: Montreal overcame a 2-0 deficit in Game 7 at Chicago Stadium to win the Cup!

But as for the more recent string of Game 7's of the Finals over the past 30+ years: it's honestly not surprising to me, because you'd expect these do-or-die games with the Cup on the line to be tight, checking, chess match-type games in which the goaltender and the defensemen are putting on a clinic and delivering the games of their lives. Think about the Blues in 2019 and that defensive performance, for example. Or Tim Thomas in 2011.

Scoring that first goal, and not relinquishing that lead, sounds more "normal" to me under the circumstances of a Game 7 of the Final than the other way around.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I remember the '95 playoffs...it was a joke at the time, that as soon as the Devils scored the first goal, the game was over, the Devils would increase the D as soon as they got the lead.

I have those numbers handy from an old project. In 1995, New Jersey rarely gave up the 1st goal (just 4 times). He did surrender a 3rd period lead and a 3rd per/OT tie on four occasions, respectively.

Interestingly, in 2000 (11 times), 2001 (13 times), and 2003 (13 times), Brodeur surrendered the first goal of the game.

 

[Hockey2Hockey]

I'm more weirded-out by how many times the Canadian franchise has lost in the Final since 1994... especially in how many lost game 7.

0-5

Edmonton & Vancouver twice each
Calgary once.

0-7 in total. Sens & Canadiens lost.

I'd say the 2011 Canucks had the "worst" loss of that bunch. Up 2-0 with home ice advantage.

 

[Crosby2010]

Not surprising to be honest. If there is a game where teams play conservative in NHL history it has always been Game 7 of the Cup final. I do think Game 7 in 1994 was still an epic game. Vancouver certainly had chances to tie it. They hit the post. But overall it is actually more rare in NHL history for lead changes in Game 7 of the Cup final. Nothing since 1987. Then of course 1971 had the Hawks collapse.

But in the original 6 the team that it is a mixed bag. 1964 and 1965 Bathgate and Beliveau respectively got early goals in the 1st period and both teams won 4-0 and never looked back. Ditto Detroit in 1955. In 1954 and 1950 it was different. Habs had a 1-0 lead going into the 2nd period but lost in overtime eventually. The Rangers had a 2-0 and 3-2 lead in Game 7 in 1950 before bowing out in overtime.

1945 in that series where Detroit evened up the series after being down 3-0 they lost Game 7 too, although they were tied in that game well into the 3rd period. However, Toronto scored first.

1942 is the only other Stanley Cup game 7 and this of course is famously the 3-0 series deficit comeback by the Leafs. It might surprise people to know that Detroit had a 1-0 lead well into the 3rd period before three goals by the Leafs.

To answer your question, I have no idea why this happened in the original 6 days but hasn't happened in almost 40 years. Because we have a big sample size of Game 7s and there is just not any budging on that.

 

[WarriorofTime]

In regular games, team that scores first wins about 2/3 of the time. So it's a bit unusual it would happen 9 times in a row (about 2-3 %), but not so crazy when accounting for we're specifically remarking on something that already occurred and what could just as easily be random variance, rather than anything forward looking. Especially so if we looked and found that, for instance, in ALL OTHER playoff games, that team that went down 0-1 in a Game 7 came back to win a disproportionately higher amount of times.

 

[connellc]

Not surprising to be honest. If there is a game where teams play conservative in NHL history it has always been Game 7 of the Cup final. I do think Game 7 in 1994 was still an epic game. Vancouver certainly had chances to tie it. They hit the post. But overall it is actually more rare in NHL history for lead changes in Game 7 of the Cup final. Nothing since 1987. Then of course 1971 had the Hawks collapse.

But in the original 6 the team that it is a mixed bag. 1964 and 1965 Bathgate and Beliveau respectively got early goals in the 1st period and both teams won 4-0 and never looked back. Ditto Detroit in 1955. In 1954 and 1950 it was different. Habs had a 1-0 lead going into the 2nd period but lost in overtime eventually. The Rangers had a 2-0 and 3-2 lead in Game 7 in 1950 before bowing out in overtime.

1945 in that series where Detroit evened up the series after being down 3-0 they lost Game 7 too, although they were tied in that game well into the 3rd period. However, Toronto scored first.

1942 is the only other Stanley Cup game 7 and this of course is famously the 3-0 series deficit comeback by the Leafs. It might surprise people to know that Detroit had a 1-0 lead well into the 3rd period before three goals by the Leafs.

To answer your question, I have no idea why this happened in the original 6 days but hasn't happened in almost 40 years. Because we have a big sample size of Game 7s and there is just not any budging on that.

I agree with everything you stated.

Just to add context, Kevin Lowe hit the post too in 1994, so the pendulum swings both ways. Everyone says that Vancouver was a Nathan Lafayette post away, but the Rangers were a Lowe post away from a more comfortable two goal lead in the third.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I agree with everything you stated.

Just to add context, Kevin Lowe hit the post too in 1994, so the pendulum swings both ways. Everyone says that Vancouver was a Nathan Lafayette post away, but the Rangers were a Lowe post away from a more comfortable two goal lead in the third.

For sure, it's always easier to view it in context of the margin the losing team needed without considering the other end of a more lopsided outcome with same marginal difference. This is definitely a human phenomenon. When a basketball game is 3-5 points, someone may see the "live betting odds" which are calculated using cold hard algorithms and be surprised at how much a favorite one team is because the game is "right there" for the taking as a possession or two can change the lead, but also aren't accounting that a possession or two could make the game considerably more lopsided.