Journal of the Operational Research Society

, Volume 68, Issue 9, pp 1006–1018 | Cite as

In search of goals: increasing ice hockey’s attractiveness by a sides swap

  • Michal Friesl
  • Liam J. A. Lenten
  • Jan Libich
  • Petr Stehlík
Article

Abstract

The popularity and business impact of major sports have been growing globally over time. This paper focuses on ice hockey, specifically the National Hockey League in North America. It reports a striking irregularity in ice hockey’s scoring dynamics relative to comparable sports such as soccer and rugby, namely a scoring surge in the middle section of the game. We explore an explanation for this irregularity related to the convention on the spatial location of the teams’ benches (which are fixed throughout the game) and on-ice sides (which are switched every period). Because a large number of the players’ substitutions occur while the play is in progress, this convention determines the distance forwards and defenders need to travel to make a substitution, and thus indirectly substitution strategies and scoring. We consider two simple operational changes that could increase the number of goals in the NHL by approximately 5 and 10%, respectively, corresponding to roughly 350 and 700 additional goals each season. This would partly offset the current downward scoring trend and thus enhance the game’s attractiveness. The estimated impact of the proposed reforms, one of which is largely costless, is robust across several specifications—using per-minute and per-second scoring data and controlling for various factors, such as bookmakers’ odds.

Keywords

sport ice hockey discrete choice models scoring dynamics 

References

  1. Asano T and Matsushima N (2014). Environmental regulation and technology transfers. Canadian Journal of Economics 47(3):889–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banerjee AN, Swinnen JFM, and Weersink A (2007). Skating on thin ice: rule changes and team strategies in the NHL. Canadian Journal of Economics 40(2):493–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bradbury JC and Drinen D (2006). The designated hitter, moral hazard, and hit batters: new evidence from game-level data. Journal of Sports Economics 7(3):319–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buttrey SE, Washburn AR and Price WL (2011). Estimating NHL scoring rates. Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports 7(3):1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fleurent C and Ferland JA (1993). Allocating games for the NHL using integer programming. Operations Research 41(4):649–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gee CJ and Leith LM (2007). Aggressive behavior in professional ice hockey: a cross-cultural comparison of North American and European born NHL players. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 8(4):567–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gretz A (2015). Breaking Down the 5 Best Options to Boost Scoring in the NHL, November 13, 2015. www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/breaking-down-the-5-best-options-to-boost-scoring-in-the-nhl.
  8. Henrickson KE (2012). Spatial competition and strategic firm location. Economic Inquiry 50(2):364–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hurley WJ (2009). Equitable birthdate categorization systems for organized minor sports competition. European Journal of Operational Research 192(1):253–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jackman RW (1987). Political institutions and voter turnout in the industrial democracies. American Political Science Review 81(2):405–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jones JCH (1969). The economics of the national hockey league. Canadian Journal of Economics 2(1):1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaplan EH, Mongeon K and Ryan JT (2014). A Markov model for hockey: manpower differential and win probability added. INFOR: Information Systems and Operations Research 52(2):39–50.Google Scholar
  13. Kendall G and Lenten LJA (2017). When sports rules go awry. European Journal of Operational Research 257(2):377–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Leeds MA and von Allmen P (2014). The Economics of Sports, 5th ed, Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
  15. Lenten LJA, Libich J and Stehlík P (2013). Policy timing and footballers’ incentives: penalties before or after extra-time? Journal of Sports Economics 14(6):629–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lenten LJA and Winchester N (2015). Secondary behavioural incentives: bonus points and rugby professionals. Economic Record 91(294):386–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lindsey GH (1963). An investigation of strategies in baseball. Operations Research 11(4):477–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lopez MJ (2015). Inefficiencies in the National Hockey League points system and the teams that take advantage. Journal of Sports Economics 14(6):410–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lopez MJ and Snyder K (2013). Biased impartiality among National Hockey League referees. International Journal of Sport Finance 8(3):208–223.Google Scholar
  20. McCannon BC (2011). Strategic offsetting behavior: evidence from National Collegiate Athletic Association men’s basketball. Contemporary Economic Policy 29(4):550–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McGarry T and Shutz RW (1997). Efficacy of traditional sport tournament structures. Journal of the Operational Research Society 48(1):65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mehrez A and Pliskin JS (1987). A new points system for soccer leagues: have expectations been realised? European Journal of Operational Research 28(2):154–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Merritt S and Clauset A (2014). Scoring dynamics across professional team sports: tempo, balance and predictability. EPJ Data Science 3(4):1–21.Google Scholar
  24. Morrison DG and Wheat RD (1986). Misapplications reviews: pulling the goalie revisited. Interfaces 16(6):28–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. NHL.com (2015). NHL to Examine Ways to Increase Scoring, November 11, 2015. www.nhl.com/news/nhl-to-examine-ways-to-increase-scoring/c-787279.
  26. Nurmi K, Goossens D and Kyngäs J (2014). Scheduling a triple round robin tournament with minitournaments for the Finnish national youth ice hockey league. Journal of the Operational Research Society 65(11):1770–1779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Paul RJ (2003). Variations in NHL attendance: the impact of violence, scoring, and regional rivalries. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 62(2):345–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Percy DF (2015). Strategy selection and outcome prediction in sport using dynamic learning for stochastic processes. Journal of the Operational Research Society 66(11):1840–1849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pettigrew S (2013). Testing Two Common Adages about when Goals are Scored, Rink Stats and other Sports Analytics. http://rinkstats.com/2013/06/testing-two-common-adages-about-when.
  30. Pettigrew S (2014). How the West will be won: using Monte Carlo simulation to estimate the effects of NHL realignment. Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports 10(3):344–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pope DG and Schweitzer ME (2011). Is Tiger Woods loss averse? Persistent bias in the face of experience, competition, and high stakes. American Economic Review 101(1):129–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Prendergast C (1999). The provision of incentives in firms. Journal of Economic Literature 37(1):7–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Thomas AC (2007). Inter-arrival times of goals in ice hockey. Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports 3(3):1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vollman R (2015). Switch to 3-on-3 Overtime Delivers Scoring Boost, National Hockey League. www.nhl.com/ice/m_news.htm?id=786374.
  35. Willis J (2014). The Incredibly Simple Rule Change That Will Boost NHL Scoring, Bleach Report, March 14. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1993318-the-incredibly-simple-rule-change-that-will-boost-nhl-scoring.
  36. Wright MB (2014). OR analysis of sporting rules—a survey. European Journal of Operational Research 232(1):1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wright MB (2009). Fifty years of OR in sport. Journal of the Operational Research Society 60(S1):S161–S168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Operational Research Society 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michal Friesl
    • 1
  • Liam J. A. Lenten
    • 2
  • Jan Libich
    • 2
    • 3
  • Petr Stehlík
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mathematics, NTISUniversity of West BohemiaPlzeňCzech Republic
  2. 2.Department of Economics and FinanceLa Trobe UniversityBundooraAustralia
  3. 3.VŠB-TU OstravaOstravaCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations