How come there were still more power plays in the DPE than there are today?

[grentthealien]

Hey guys perhaps this is a dumb question and there’s something obvious that I’m missing but as someone who only started watching after the 04 lockout I have always just assumed there were less power plays before it then there were after it. There was that initial boom in power plays that everyone mentions from 05 to 07 but after that opportunities seem to have plateaued back to where they were before until completely dipping in the 2010s.

I guess I found this surprising because one of the main reasons for the lack of scoring that is often given along with the popularity of the trap is all of the blatant obstruction that wasn’t being called at the time. I guess I was expecting there to be even less opportunities than there was today because of that but at least from the averages I’m getting from hockey reference that appears not to be the case. Was there just so much obstruction that a league wide average of 4 power plays was actually low in comparison to what was happening on the ice?

Anyway, if anyone who watched a lot of Dead puck era hockey could give me a broader perspective on the frequency of what was and wasn’t being called at the time it would be greatly appreciated

NHL League Averages | Hockey-Reference.com

Click to read more...

 

[tarheelhockey]

Was there just so much obstruction that a league wide average of 4 power plays was actually low in comparison to what was happening on the ice?

Pretty much. Lots of stick obstruction especially. Lots of pinning a guy to the boards and holding him there. Post-lockout hockey instantly had more flow as those tactics were eliminated, and over the past decade has really become a lot faster north-south. Players have far more freedom of movement.

Notably, DPE games featured roughly 1/3rd more power plays but roughly 1/3rd less PP effectiveness. Today we see more shots with a lower save%.

 

[The Panther]

Yeah, it's kind of odd but it seems like only in recent years has coaching strategy actually taken seriously the fact that being short-handed kills your team.

(I mean, it always did kill teams, but I guess as long as both teams were taking 14 minors and 4 majors per game, it all came out even in the end. I mean, it was actually management strategy up to the early 2000s to acquire players for the express purpose of their taking penalties.)

Anyway, today, add in how relatively clean the game is now (far, far cleaner than probably any time in the history of the NHL, anyway) and you've got a perfect storm of few penalties.

 

[Hobnobs]

Pretty much. Lots of stick obstruction especially. Lots of pinning a guy to the boards and holding him there. Post-lockout hockey instantly had more flow as those tactics were eliminated, and over the past decade has really become a lot faster north-south. Players have far more freedom of movement.

Notably, DPE games featured roughly 1/3rd more power plays but roughly 1/3rd less PP effectiveness. Today we see more shots with a lower save%.

The problem was also the pure randomness of calls. You could for example see Aaron Ward cling onto someones back and ride them the length of the ice in one play and then see Lidström called for a holding penalty for putting his hand on a shoulder the next.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Lots more hooking

 

[MarkusKetterer]

The problem was also the pure randomness of calls. You could for example see Aaron Ward cling onto someones back and ride them the length of the ice in one play and then see Lidström called for a holding penalty for putting his hand on a shoulder the next.

So the same as now, but with different last names.