The "More Goals" Fallacy
James Mirtle has a thorough look at the rate of scoring in today's NHL, compared to previous years.
As always, his statistical work is easy to grasp. There were more goals in 1970s and 1980s than there are today. Current NHL scoring is comparable to the period running from the late 1950s through early 1970s.
Which leads Mirtle to ask, "How many goals should there be?"
So there's a range there, between five and eight goals (per game), where essentially every hockey league falls into. Is there more entertainment value at one level over another? And is it worth making a major change to keep the NHL well above the 5.0 mark?The answer to both questions is no.
Scoring is a byproduct of good hockey. It is not an end in itself.
When people demand more goals from the NHL, they begin with an assumption: More Goals=Better Game.
The correlation is false. Goals are just one element of entertaining hockey. In many great games, scoring is far from the most appealing part of the spectacle.
"How many goals should there be?" is the wrong question. Good hockey is not achieved by targeting arbitrary statistical benchmarks.
Historical goals-per-game stats are interesting, but of limited relevance. If I watch the Bruins play the Blackhawks this season, does it matter how many goals the same teams scored in 1988 or 1963?
Is it the NHL's job to produce a good game? Or to produce statistics that will look good when laid out on a 100-year graph?
When the next NHL season begins, we won't hear much about goals-per-game for a few weeks. Then someone will write an article revealing that scoring is not on the rise. Maybe it's down from last season, or 10 years ago, or 30 years ago.
Cue the usual hysteria. Commentators will declare the NHL "in crisis" and demand changes to "save the game." Bigger nets! Four-on-four! More pucks! Etcetera.
Which raises another question: If people didn't see the stats, would they know they are unhappy?
(Photo: Phillip MacCallum/Getty Images)
Comments
I love a good close hockey game. It’s far more exciting, to me, for the game to have low numbers as it means the defense and goalie are doing their job and we get to see how creative the forwards are.
Hey we just launched a pick up hockey finder website and are hoping to have a few hockey bloggers post a note about it or add us to the blogroll.
pickuphockeyfinder.com is basically a tool for players to find game, as well as for organizers to post and promote games.
We are starting in our home area of Minneapolis but already have a few organizers of pickup hockey asking about using the system for their games (one in Boston and one in Seattle). Our dream is for people to be able to find a pickup game all over North America.
Let me know if you would be willing to do a quick blurb about it.
Derrik
Jamie,
Great column as usual. I have to agree; I normally find that I am happily following a season of hockey until somebody has to pipe up and tell me that I shouldn’t be because scoring is down. Boo-hoo, in my opinion a well played 1-0 game can be just as entertaining as any.
However, I don’t think you’re right when you say that “Scoring is a byproduct of good hockey.” Scoring can also be a byproduct of bad hockey.
Have you ever been to a hockey game that is at 6-0? Sure, one team is playing good hockey, but it is impossible to look at the game and say “wow, this is good hockey” because surely the losing team has had to choke quite drastically to wind up in that situation. Two championship teams could easily play each other to a thrilling 1-1 regulation, while the bottom of the barrel teams might combine for 15 against each other in a stinker.
No, to be honest, I would say that goals are not a byproduct of good or bad hockey. I think that they are completely unrelated to the quality of the hockey game.
I remember my dad taking me to the stadium in the mid 60’s. As I remember scoring was about the same as in todays game.Leave the game alone. Interest is back after years of softball scoring hockey games.However if the Hawks can score 10 goals a game,I don’t have a problem with that