"Game Management"

[Sol]

Could have told you myself nhl refs are complete trash and an embarrassment to this sport.

 

[Riseonfire]

This graph should NOT be as linear as it is.

Refs (hopefully though implicit bias and not on purpose) stop calling penalties on one team if they've taken too many and look to 'even it up'


The makeup call is 100% real.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Someone on reddit made an interesting comment: The best way to build a team is to have an extremely good PP% and PK%, plus a few guys who constantly take penalties to get your special teams on the ice.

I realize there would be declining returns from this approach, due to human factors, but it's a fascinating way to think about roster construction. Assuming the principle in the OP holds true, under these conditions the more penalties you take the more likely you would be to win the game.

To put it another way: Boston, Florida, Vegas, St. Louis, Edmonton, Washington, Carolina are all top-10 in both PP and PK. It is actually to their advantage to go crazy taking penalties, knowing they are statistically likely to outpace the other team's PP goal production by receiving "game management" PPs in return. This is especially true for Carolina, who also happen to produce SHG at a high rate.

 

[crab]

i.e., how the Bruins won the Cup in 2010-2011.

 

[pabst blue ribbon]

Hockey Refs Are Out To Get You (If They Already Got The Other Guy)

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

I would much rather see the refs call the rule book and act in the interest of player safety and ensure teams follow the rules. I know that sounds insane, but I feel comfortable banking on the players to play a competitive and exciting game. I don't need to officials to do that

 

[The Crypto Guy]

Smart teams exploit the hell out of this.

Love for you to explain this and show examples of teams who do this.

 

[ponder]

It suggests a smart move would be to build an aggressive physical team with very good special teams.

You get to take liberties with other teams, and regardless of how physical they are, the PP opportunities will generally be pretty equal.

You see it individually too. If teams were called on penalties they do against McDavid, they'd spend the whole game in the box.

At different times over the years, Boston, Washington, Tampa, Anaheim, SJ and Pittsburgh have had teams that very much do this.

 

[ponder]

Hockey Refs Are Out To Get You (If They Already Got The Other Guy)

View attachment 295453

Even worse, this trend exists DESPITE teams knowing about it. If you’ve taken the last 2-3 penalties, you play way more aggressive knowing the next call won’t be against you. And if you’ve been on 2-3 straight PPs, you tippy toe around, then STILL get called for brushing up against someone.

The real trend should be not flat, but the INVERSE of this. Dirty teams should be taking way more penalties, in general the team taking the last 2-3 penalties should be the dirtier team, and thus should be MORE likely to take the next one, not way less likely.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

It would be amusing to see a team go all-in on this strategy and straight-up dare the refs to call holding and hooking after they’ve already been penalized several times for way worse stuff.

I’d say upwards of 90% of refs would overlook a flagrant hold by a team that already has multiple slashing majors.

That’s when this started: the 70s.

 

[Siludin]

From a tactical point of view, officials aren't going to call 20 penalties against a team per night, so why not be the aggressor and look for your PK and game management to bail you out. It has traditionally worked well for some teams.

It's literally the No. 1 strategy in the playoffs.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Someone on reddit made an interesting comment: The best way to build a team is to have an extremely good PP% and PK%, plus a few guys who constantly take penalties to get your special teams on the ice.

I realize there would be declining returns from this approach, due to human factors, but it's a fascinating way to think about roster construction. Assuming the principle in the OP holds true, under these conditions the more penalties you take the more likely you would be to win the game.

To put it another way: Boston, Florida, Vegas, St. Louis, Edmonton, Washington, Carolina are all top-10 in both PP and PK. It is actually to their advantage to go crazy taking penalties, knowing they are statistically likely to outpace the other team's PP goal production by receiving "game management" PPs in return. This is especially true for Carolina, who also happen to produce SHG at a high rate.

This is doubly true since “specialists” are priced at a discount. 5v5 production comes at a massive premium.

 

[613Leafer]

It's literally the No. 1 strategy in the playoffs.

Playoffs are extra interesting because the standard for what's a penalty is also drastically lowered.

Beyond game management, the NHL also has a completely different rulebook for the playoffs, interference slashing, and crosschecking in particular I find they just ignore regularly.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

It would be amusing to see a team go all-in on this strategy and straight-up dare the refs to call holding and hooking after they’ve already been penalized several times for way worse stuff.

I’d say upwards of 90% of refs would overlook a flagrant hold by a team that already has multiple slashing majors.

I think that's called the Derian Hatcher strategy.

If you commit enough infractions, eventually they'll stop calling penalties on them because it would look ridiculous.

 

[3074326]

This has as much to do with the fans complaining constantly as it does officiating. Gotta keep the consumers happy. The mess they've created is just the culmination of years of this behavior on both sides (and I'm definitely a part of it, no doubt).

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Could you imagine the outrage if MLB umpires were instructed to keep walks and strikeouts close? There would be congressional inquires.

 

[Dexter Colt]

Total pen mins per season won't tell you anything about GAME management by refs. You have to use penalties per each game as your samples. I like the study, just doubt the method was optimal. Can you run it by game? I suspect we'll see a high correlation result, but don't think it will be as high.

I second this. It's a great question to ask, but some additional things could be considered.

Coincidental penalties could also be taken out of the sample, as they're not what's being attempted to measure, yet can alter results. It's also worth asking if there are other things that could explain some of the variance in penalties taken in addition to merely penalties drawn. Could for example a tight game or trailing affect this? I'd imagine the amount of driving the play partly causes the amount of chances for the opponent to infract the play. And once adding terms to the model, it's also worth keeping in mind that R2 will never go down, so it's not a validation in itself.

 

[Bounces R Way]

Only a tale as old as time. Pro Sports is entertainment, to think there's always going to be a complete equitable setup for them is just unrealistic.

 

[Dekes For Days]

This is sickening.

 

[Hattrickkane88]

I would much rather see the refs call the rule book and act in the interest of player safety and ensure teams follow the rules. I know that sounds insane, but I feel comfortable banking on the players to play a competitive and exciting game. I don't need to officials to do that

It's crazy but in their mind part of why the do it is because of player safety and following the rules. They are worried that if you call four straight penalties on the same team somebody is eventually going to lose it and make one of those penalties count by crippling someone.

Not saying it's right or wrong but that is part of their mindset of calling an even game.

 

[Tom Polakis]

Neither the plot in the OP or that one with the team logos make a meaningful argument about game management, but that plot by 538.com in Post #30 is pretty damning. That plot shows what happens in individual games after a team has more or less penalties, and if no game management were happening, it should be a flat, horizontal line at 50 percent. That strong, upward slope says that refs really are influenced by which team has more penalties.

 

[TOGuy14]

I put this chart together using penalty data from nhl.com from the last 10 years to take a look at "game management" in the NHL. It's obviously a very basic analysis for a complicated (alleged) issue, but the correlation is also incredibly high.

If reffing were purely objective, you'd expect there to be a weak relationship between penalties drawn and penalties taken. There could still be some correlation, because if one team is being aggressive and dirty, it can tend to bring out that same behaviour in the other team. Regardless, over a full regular season, you'd expect that a "dirty team" would be penalized far more than their opponents, and a "clean team" to be penalized far less than their opponents.

Above is date from 2010-present, 10 seasons (with the asterix of 2013 being lockout shortened, and this season being only partially completed). There is a VERY strong correlation, R2 value of 0.912 for those of you that know basic statistics. To me this absolutely screams that refs are interfering in games on a very very regular basis. Rather than calling games objectively, they constantly do "make up calls", and try not to "interfere" in the game too much.

I.e., if one team is dirty and gaining a lot of penalties, they'll make a bunch of softer calls on the other team to "even things up" (this represents the higher end of the distribution where teams with a ton of penalties for also have a ton of penalties against). On the flip side, cleaner teams, because they commit very few penalties, will have very few penalties called on their opponents regardless of how the opponent is playing, allowing their opponents to get away with what should be penalties (see low end of the distribution).

This creates a situation where refs aren't calling penalties objectively on both teams, but are instead constantly shifting the goalposts, and creating different standards for different teams.

It really bothers me that these axes are not equally spaced to give a better visual comparison

 

[Neuf]

There was a game a year ago where Jets had 8 straight called against them.

Preds lead Jets 8-0 in minor penalties so far

Next period Jets had a PP and only 2 other calls were made in that game.

The strange thing is when the 8th was called, the camera showed chevaldayoff angry on the phone...

 

[supsens]

Neither the plot in the OP or that one with the team logos make a meaningful argument about game management, but that plot by 538.com in Post #30 is pretty damning. That plot shows what happens in individual games after a team has more or less penalties, and if no game management were happening, it should be a flat, horizontal line at 50 percent. That strong, upward slope says that refs really are influenced by which team has more penalties.

Ummm in a sport where the bad teams take four a night and the good teams take 3 a night why would a team with zero penalties not be expected to get one sooner or later? and by the time the other team has 3 it’s later.....
It bet it would line up fairly well with time played without taking a penalty. No matter how many the other team has taken
If you have no penalties in the last 35 minutes the probability you get the next penalty is higher than if you just took a penalty.
People are reading charts not understanding how close these teams all are in every category and blaming a person because they “think” it should be different

 

[Tom Polakis]

Ummm in a sport where the bad teams take four a night and the good teams take 3 a night why would a team with zero penalties not be expected to get one sooner or later? and by the time the other team has 3 it’s later.....
It bet it would line up fairly well with time played without taking a penalty. No matter how many the other team has taken
If you have no penalties in the last 35 minutes the probability you get the next penalty is higher than if you just took a penalty.
People are reading charts not understanding how close these teams all are in every category and blaming a person because they “think” it should be different

From what you just wrote, you are certainly not understanding that plot from 538.com. Look at it again, and ask yourself why there should be an upward slope fitting those points.

The x axis shows difference in penalties, not how many penalties were taken. It reveals that if you have taken less penalties, you are more likely to get the next one. The likelihood should of taking the next penalty should not be in any way influenced by how many the other team has taken. That's what people have coined the term "game management" to describe. Frankly, I doubted that game management was even an actual thing, but that plot proves that it really is. It clearly illustrates that refs are evening up the penalties based on which team has been penalized more.