socratic
Registered User
- Jun 27, 2011
- 292
- 2
Watching a recent game, and seeing a few guys head to the box, it dawned on me how effective NHL powerplays really have become. Yet it seems most teams take an "ahh well" approach to a player taking a penalty that should have been avoided.
PPG typically represent 20-30% of a teams total goals. So if you're playing against Pittsburgh and you can train your team to take 50% fewer penalties, you cut Pittsburgh scoring rate by 15%.
Looking at New Jersey this year, their low rate of penalties have probably saved them about .5 goals per game.
Obviously the counter argument here is one that is sometimes heard in basketball - that if you're not committing fouls, you're not playing defense hard enough. One could say that in order to be effective you need to be risking penalties, but I don't know if that's the case (and New Jersey, with the fewest penalty minutes in the league thus far, has a respectable 64 goals against overall).
I am looking at getting a bit further into the numbers on this, but has anybody looked into this on the forum before?
PPG typically represent 20-30% of a teams total goals. So if you're playing against Pittsburgh and you can train your team to take 50% fewer penalties, you cut Pittsburgh scoring rate by 15%.
Looking at New Jersey this year, their low rate of penalties have probably saved them about .5 goals per game.
Obviously the counter argument here is one that is sometimes heard in basketball - that if you're not committing fouls, you're not playing defense hard enough. One could say that in order to be effective you need to be risking penalties, but I don't know if that's the case (and New Jersey, with the fewest penalty minutes in the league thus far, has a respectable 64 goals against overall).
I am looking at getting a bit further into the numbers on this, but has anybody looked into this on the forum before?
