PDA

View Full Version : 2015-16 winning percentage by goals scored.



Pages : 1 [2] 3

Sean Pickett
01-30-2016, 02:17 AM
Pretty interesting stuff. I have been tracking stats for BC performance in the NCAAs under York for quite a while and always found a very interesting conclusion. The first team to get to 3 goals almost always wins.

In 46 games:
- A team failed to get to three goals only 7 times.
- In the other 39 games, only twice has the first team to reach 3 goals lost the game
- So of the applicable 39 games, about a 95% winning percentage (37-2)I decided to see what the numbers are for games played this season.
- I came up with 605 games through Friday in which at least one team scored 3 goals. The first team to score 3 goals has gone 524-37-44 for a 90.2% winning percentage.
- Of those both teams scored at least 3 goals in 177 games. The first team to score 3 goals has gone 96-37-44 for a 66.7% winning percentage.
- Oddly, on Friday there were five games in which both teams scored at least 3 goals and the first team to reach 3 goals went 1-3-1.

Sean

Sean Pickett
01-31-2016, 10:46 AM
I decided to see what the numbers are for games played this season.
- I came up with 605 games through Friday in which at least one team scored 3 goals. The first team to score 3 goals has gone 524-37-44 for a 90.2% winning percentage.
- Of those both teams scored at least 3 goals in 177 games. The first team to score 3 goals has gone 96-37-44 for a 66.7% winning percentage.
- Oddly, on Friday there were five games in which both teams scored at least 3 goals and the first team to reach 3 goals went 1-3-1.

SeanOn Saturday things returned to normal:
- the first team that scored three goals went 14-1-2, an 88.2% winning percentage
- in games both teams scored at least three goals, the first to score 3 went 5-1-2, a 75.0% winning percentage.

For the season the totals improved to:
- when at least one team scored three goals, the first team to score 3 is 538-38-46, a 90.2% winning percentage
- when both teams score 3 goals, the first team to score 3 is 101-38-46, a 67.0% winning percentage

Sean

Sean Pickett
01-31-2016, 07:53 PM
On Sunday:
- the first team that scored three goals went 3-0-0, a 100% winning percentage

For the season the totals improved to:
- when at least one team scored three goals, the first team to score 3 is 541-38-46, a 90.2% winning percentage
- when both teams score 3 goals, the first team to score 3 is 101-38-46, a 67.0% winning percentage

Sean

Sean Pickett
02-07-2016, 01:22 PM
This past week (Monday-Saturday):
- the first team that scored three goals went 34-1-3, a 93.4% winning percentage
- when both teams scored 3 goals, the first team to score 3 went 8-1-3, a 79.2% winning percentage

For the season the totals are:
- when at least one team scored three goals, the first team to score 3 is 575-39-49, a 90.4% winning percentage
- when both teams score 3 goals, the first team to score 3 is 109-39-49, a 67.7% winning percentage

Sean

Sean Pickett
02-13-2016, 11:50 PM
This past week (Sunday-Saturday):
- the first team that scored three goals went 37-1-4, a 92.9% winning percentage
- when both teams scored 3 goals, the first team to score 3 went 8-1-4, a 76.9% winning percentage

For the season the totals are:
- when at least one team scored three goals, the first team to score 3 is 612-40-53, a 90.6% winning percentage
- when both teams score 3 goals, the first team to score 3 is 117-40-53, a 68.3% winning percentage

Sean

Sean Pickett
04-11-2016, 10:49 PM
I just completed an analysis of the scores from all NCAA D1 games (exhibitions, games against D3 or club teams NOT included) this season through play of 1/25/2016.

I counted shoot-outs and those silly 3-3 OTs at ties.

Teams that score ZERO goals in a game have a record of 0-115-8 Winning Percentage .0325
Teams that score ONE goal are 16-174-68 (.1938)
Teams that score TWO goals are 60-200-50 (.2742)
Teams that score THREE goals are 158-90-54 (.6126)
Teams that score FOUR goals are 145-32-16 (.7927)
Teams that score FIVE goals are 122-4-12 (.9275)
Teams that score SIX goals are 68-2-4 (.9459)
Teams that score SEVEN goals are 34-1-0 (.9714)
Teams that score EIGHT goals are 11-0-0 (1.000)
Teams that score NINE goals are 3-0-0 (1.000)
Nobody has scored exactly TEN.
Team that scores ELEVEN goals is 1-0-0 (1.000)

The difference between 2 and 3 REALLY blew me away.Even though I haven't posted in this thread for some time I continued to track winning percentages for teams that were the first to score their third goal of the game. In fact I am working on tracking more than that. However, first I thought I would update Freddie's stats through the end of the season. Unlike Freddie I included all games vs DI/DII/DIII varsity teams. I also only counted ties once, so my stats show fewer ties.

0 goals - 0-164-4, 0.0119
1 goal - 25-317-39, 0.1168
2 goals - 112-293-42, 0.2975
3 goals - 250-139-37, 0.6303
4 goals - 239-60-11, 0.7887
5 goals - 185-10-7, 0.9332
6 goals - 101-1-2, 0.9808
7 goals - 50-1-0, 0.9804
8 goals - 15-0-0, 1.0000
9 goals - 6-0-0, 1.0000
10 goals - 1-0-0, 1.0000
11 goals - 1-0-0, 1.0000

overall - 985-985-142, 0.5000

Sean

Sean Pickett
04-12-2016, 12:06 AM
Here are some final stats for teams that score their third goal first.

This season DI men's teams played 1127 non-exhibition games against varsity teams. Of those, in 221 games (19.6% of all games) neither team scored three goals, leaving 906 games in which at least one team scored 3 goals. In those game the teams that scored their third goal first had a record of 794-55-57, a 90.8% winning percentage. In only 268 games (23.8% of all games played) did both teams score three goals and in those the teams that scored the third goal first had a record of 156-55-57, a 68.8% winning percentage.

I also looked at all 1230 regular season NHL games this past season. For this comparison I counted shootouts the same as ties. There were 261 games (21.2% of all games) in which neither team scored three goals, leaving 969 games in which at least one team scored 3 goals. In those games the teams that scored their third goal first had a record of 869-68-32, a 91.3% winning percentage. In only 269 games (21.9% of all games played) did both teams score three goals and in those the teams that scored their third goal first had a record of 169-68-32, a 68.8% winning percentage.

I have also combined the stats for DI men and NHL games. This season there were a combined 2357 games, of which in 482 games (20.4% of all games) neither team scored three goals. In the remaining 1875 games in which at least one team scored 3 goals the teams that scored their third goal first had a record of 1663-123-89, a 91.1% winning percentage. In 537 games (22.8% of all games played) both teams score three goals and in those the teams that scored their third goal first had a record of 325-123-89, a 68.8% winning percentage.

For a quick comparison, DI men's teams that scored three or more goals had a record of 848-210-57, a 78.6% winning percentage and NHL team's that scored three or more goals had a record of 924-235-30, a 79.0% winning percentage.

Sean

purpleinnebraska
04-12-2016, 09:46 AM
Here are some final stats for teams that score their third goal first.

This season DI men's teams played 1127 non-exhibition games against varsity teams. Of those, in 221 games (19.6% of all games) neither team scored three goals, leaving 906 games in which at least one team scored 3 goals. In those game the teams that scored their third goal first had a record of 794-55-57, a 90.8% winning percentage. In only 286 games (23.8% of all games played) did both teams score three goals and in those the teams that scored the third goal first had a record of 156-55-57, a 68.8% winning percentage.

I also looked at all 1230 regular season NHL games this past season. For this comparison I counted shootouts the same as ties. There were 261 games (21.2% of all games) in which neither team scored three goals, leaving 969 games in which at least one team scored 3 goals. In those games the teams that scored their third goal first had a record of 869-68-32, a 91.3% winning percentage. In only 269 games (21.9% of all games played) did both teams score three goals and in those the teams that scored their third goal first had a record of 169-68-32, a 68.8% winning percentage.

I have also combined the stats for DI men and NHL games. This season there were a combined 2357 games, of which in 482 games (20.4% of all games) neither team scored three goals. In the remaining 1875 games in which at least one team scored 3 goals the teams that scored their third goal first had a record of 1663-123-89, a 91.1% winning percentage. In 537 games (22.8% of all games played) both teams score three goals and in those the teams that scored their third goal first had a record of 325-123-89, a 68.8% winning percentage.

For a quick comparison, DI men's teams that scored three or more goals had a record of 848-210-57, a 78.6% winning percentage and NHL team's that scored three or more goals had a record of 924-235-30, a 79.0% winning percentage.

Sean

Thanks for the work you put into this! I was discouraged with how low scoring I felt WCHA games were this year, so I decided to compare our conference numbers against your totals and see if we actually were that dull. In 153 WCHA conference matchups (I included conference tournament games), there were 43 games where no one scored 3 goals, versus 110 where at least one team did. This is 28.1% of games of less than 3 versus your figure of 19.6% across college hockey, a number which drops to 18.3% when you remove the WCHA games. That's a pretty big disparity. In addition, 3 goals or more brought a winning percentage of 84.6% in conference play, versus 78.6% across NCAA play. Although not as statistically significant as the other gap, it still means 3 is more than enough in the WCHA. The question is, will the WCHA take steps to address the lack of scoring, or just say, "We have great goaltenders and coaches"? Because I have a hard time believing our goaltenders and coaches are that much better than those in other leagues.

Sean Pickett
04-12-2016, 06:22 PM
Thanks for the work you put into this! I was discouraged with how low scoring I felt WCHA games were this year, so I decided to compare our conference numbers against your totals and see if we actually were that dull. In 153 WCHA conference matchups (I included conference tournament games), there were 43 games where no one scored 3 goals, versus 110 where at least one team did. This is 28.1% of games of less than 3 versus your figure of 19.6% across college hockey, a number which drops to 18.3% when you remove the WCHA games. That's a pretty big disparity. In addition, 3 goals or more brought a winning percentage of 84.6% in conference play, versus 78.6% across NCAA play. Although not as statistically significant as the other gap, it still means 3 is more than enough in the WCHA. The question is, will the WCHA take steps to address the lack of scoring, or just say, "We have great goaltenders and coaches"? Because I have a hard time believing our goaltenders and coaches are that much better than those in other leagues.I just knew someone would be interested in conference stats. :) Because of that my workbook tracks all conference/non-conference/conference tournament/NCAA tournament games. However, in looking at such small subsets of data anomalies can and do appear (see below), so I have been researching past seasons as well. I have put a put a workbook (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/148VdgSLux0QRzujoVM3frc1JsmKSLfjoJXwuxaVODCA/edit?usp=sharing) on Google Docs with conference and overall data for the past three seasons individually and combined (2013-16).

I’m not looking at average scoring per game, but as I have goal data for every game I added goal information to the workbook I put online. As can be seen the overall goals per game average dipped slightly in 2014-15 but is almost the same this past season as in 2013-14. However, it has dropped in each of the past two seasons in the WCHA, and is down a full half-goal per game by both teams. The ECAC’s three season average is a tick lower than the WCHA’s, but its average went up this past season. Atlantic Hockey’s goal scoring decreased almost as much (0.48) as the WCHA over the past two seasons, but they had a higher average to start. Hockey East’s average has gone up, as has that for non-conference games, but nothing like the B1G, which has seen goal scoring increase close to 2 goals (1.77) per game for both teams. If you like goal scoring the B1G was the league to watch this past season and if you like low scoring games the WCHA was the league to watch this past season.

As can be seen on the 2015-16 sheet the ECAC edged out the WCHA for highest percentage of games with less than 3 goals by either team (42 of 152 vs. 42 of 153). The B1G, with the smallest number of league games by 43, had the lowest percentage of games under 3 goals (5 of 65, just 7.7%). Non-conference games had the second lowest percentage at 14.6% (47 of 321 games), while the NCHC was the only other conference to have less than 20% of league games with less than 3 goals by either team. On the flip-side, with just 23 games out of 153 (15.0%) in which both teams scored 3 goals, the WCHA had the lowest percentage by far among the leagues in that category.

However, in 2013-14 the B1G had the highest percentage of games with less than 3 goals by either team (21 of 65, 32.3% of all games) and the WCHA had 17.8% of games (37 of 152) with less than 3 goals by either team, slightly less than the overall average for that season. And for the 2014-15 season the WCHA had just 18 of 151 games (11.9%) in which both teams scored at least 3 goals. That same season the ECAC had 21 of 154 games (13.6%) in which both teams scored 3 goals and also had 44 of 154 games (28.6%) in which neither scored three goals. As I mentioned before, working with such small data sets (B1G games are less than 6% of all games played in 2015-16, Atlantic Hockey games are less than 16% and the other 4 leagues are each less than 14%) a few games can make a difference.

In regards to winning when being the first to score 3 goals, Atlantic Hockey teams had an abnormally good record, with a 95.0% winning percentage, but it only brought their three season average up to 88.1%. The NCHC likewise had an excellent record, winning 95.6% of such games, but unlike the AH, they have the best three season average at 92.2%. The WCHA edges out Hockey East for the second best conference record over the past three seasons at 91.5%, although non-conference games are slightly higher as 91.7%. The WCHA would likely have a higher average, if not for decreased scoring leading to 10 more games (from 32 to 42) in which neither team scored 3 goals this past season. The only other conference to see an increase in such games was the NCHC, which went from 16 to 18.

Over the past three seasons the average winning percentage for a team that scores 3 goals first is a solid 90.5%. However, when both teams score at least 3 goals the winning percentage drops to just 66.6%, with 63.1% of those winning teams (274 of 434) never losing the lead. That means teams not scoring 3 goals first actually have a winning record (181-160-146, 52.2%) if they are able to tie up the game. Still, with only one team scoring three or more goals in 1923 of 3348 games (57.4%) the past three seasons getting that 3rd goal first appears does appear to be the best path to winning the game.

Sean

Sean Pickett
04-15-2016, 01:33 PM
During the Frozen Four championship game ESPN threw out the fact that North Dakota was something like 70-0-5 when leading after two periods over the last three seasons. I decided to see how they had done when scoring 3 goals first over the same period and they have been much better than average, although they did lose a game three seasons ago:
2015-16 - 26-0-2, 0.964 (34-6-4, 0.818 overall)
2014-15 - 25-0-1, 0.981 (29-10-3, 0.726 overall)
2013-14 - 22-1-1, 0.938 (25-14- 3, 0.631 overall)
2013-16 - 73-1-4, 0.962 (88-30-10, 0.727 overall)

I also looked at how BU has done over the same span:
2015-16 - 17-0-2, 0.947 (21-13-5, 0.577 overall)
2014-15 - 23-1-0, 0.958 (28-8-5, 0.744 overall)
2013-14 - 9-0-1, 0.950 (10-21-4, 0.343 overall)
2013-16 - 49-1-3, 0.953 (59-42-14, 0.574)

Interestingly, about 83% of both teams wins came from games in which they scored 3 goals first. If anyone is interested in these stats for a specific team just post what team(s) you are interested in and I'll post them.

Sean

AKSWF
04-15-2016, 06:27 PM
Teams that score ZERO goals in a game have a record of 0-115-8 Winning Percentage .0325
Teams that score ONE goal are 16-174-68 (.1938)
Teams that score TWO goals are 60-200-50 (.2742)
Teams that score THREE goals are 158-90-54 (.6126)

The difference between 2 and 3 REALLY blew me away.

Explains UAA's 20+ year streak of losing seasons.

fr. joe
04-16-2016, 06:29 AM
Sean, thanks for the mountain of stats and analysis! As a college hockey fan since the early 70's, your data backs up what I have seen over the last 15+ years. The theme in hockey has been towards a greater emphasis on development of the defensive side of the game. Think about how improvement in goalie equipment, goalie crease dimensions and the favoring of mobile defensive corps have changed the game. Better youth hockey instruction has emphasized both ends of the ice...

In the 70/80's how many teams had team-GAAs below 2.50? They were few and far between. Today, most every league has at lest 3 goalies with sub-2 GAAs. And a sub-2 GAA is not the guarantee of a gaudy W-L record, either.

Goal scoring is down but I think today's game is better, more competitive night in and night out.

Sean Pickett
04-16-2016, 01:26 PM
Sean, thanks for the mountain of stats and analysis! As a college hockey fan since the early 70's, your data backs up what I have seen over the last 15+ years. The theme in hockey has been towards a greater emphasis on development of the defensive side of the game. Think about how improvement in goalie equipment, goalie crease dimensions and the favoring of mobile defensive corps have changed the game. Better youth hockey instruction has emphasized both ends of the ice...

In the 70/80's how many teams had team-GAAs below 2.50? They were few and far between. Today, most every league has at lest 3 goalies with sub-2 GAAs. And a sub-2 GAA is not the guarantee of a gaudy W-L record, either.

Goal scoring is down but I think today's game is better, more competitive night in and night out.Barry Melrose had an obsession with Thatcher Demko's goalie pads during the NCAA Tournament this year. :eek:

Even 18 seasons ago there was more scoring than now. For the 1998-99 season the average was 3.22 goals per team per game and this season it was 2.79 gpg (last season it was even lower, 2.71 gpg). Also, in 1998-99 there were only 136 of 996 games in which neither team scored at least 3 goals, just 14.7% of all games. This past season there were 221 of 1127 games, 19.6% of all games, and in 2014-15 it was 241 of 1110, 21.7% of all games. So not only scoring is down, but low scoring games are on the rise. And well I like good hockey games, I also like to see scoring (only by BU, of course :D).

On the women's side scoring is even lower, and has gone down even more dramatically, than on the men's side. This past season it was 2.52 goals per game per team and there were 200 of 626 games in which neither team scored at least 3 goals, 31.9% of all games. For the 1998-99 season it was 3.39 pgp and there were 36 of 309 games in which neither team scored 3 goals, just 11.7% of all games.

Sean

joecct
04-16-2016, 03:26 PM
Sean, thanks for the mountain of stats and analysis! As a college hockey fan since the early 70's, your data backs up what I have seen over the last 15+ years. The theme in hockey has been towards a greater emphasis on development of the defensive side of the game. Think about how improvement in goalie equipment, goalie crease dimensions and the favoring of mobile defensive corps have changed the game. Better youth hockey instruction has emphasized both ends of the ice...

In the 70/80's how many teams had team-GAAs below 2.50? They were few and far between. Today, most every league has at lest 3 goalies with sub-2 GAAs. And a sub-2 GAA is not the guarantee of a gaudy W-L record, either.

Goal scoring is down but I think today's game is better, more competitive night in and night out.

1976 Eastern AA goalie had a .885 sv% and a 4.40 GAA.

fr. joe
04-17-2016, 03:18 AM
1976 Eastern AA goalie had a .885 sv% and a 4.40 GAA.

You're probably talking about Clarkson's Brian Shields... I saw him play RPI several times. The game was different then... the Clarksons, BUs, UNHs and Cornells who dominated the ECAC in the mid 70's were scoring machines. The Brian Shields, Jim Craigs, VanDerMarks (wish I could recall the first name of Cornell's top goalie) were few and far between. Only a few teams like Harvard played with a commitment to a relatively defensive style. (RPI was about 6th in the ECAC that year and probably averaged 5-5.5 goals a game.) ECAC hockey often was story of the 'haves and have nots.' Top 8 teams made the playoffs and generally the top 3 or 4 made it each year (most of the talented players gravitated there) ... with a scramble for the rest.

Standout defensemen were pretty rare. People often forget that Rod Langway played at UNH (for 2 years?). Goalies with gaudy stats just didn't exist in the 70's.

ECAC, CCHA teams played racehorse hockey back then. WCHA had lots of scoring and featured very physical play.

fr. joe
04-17-2016, 03:30 AM
The top players were Canadians... and the cream of the Canadian crop with professional aspirations played in Junior A. The players at the next level played US college hockey. (Do you recall how rare it was then for an NHL player to have an NCAA college hockey background?) That contributed to the style of play as well. The difference in talent between the teams and even in a particular team's roster depth was striking.

Would love to see the % breakdown between Canadian and US players college hockey in 1975-1996-2015. Recollections: most of the Ivies had a good number of Canadians. RPI, Cornell and Colgate were almost all Canadian. Harvard, BU, BC were predominantly New England players. Minnesota was all in-state players and proud of it. North Dakota, Wisconsin, Denver, CC had their share of Canadians.

gfmorris
04-17-2016, 05:54 AM
Thanks for the work you put into this! I was discouraged with how low scoring I felt WCHA games were this year, so I decided to compare our conference numbers against your totals and see if we actually were that dull. In 153 WCHA conference matchups (I included conference tournament games), there were 43 games where no one scored 3 goals, versus 110 where at least one team did. This is 28.1% of games of less than 3 versus your figure of 19.6% across college hockey, a number which drops to 18.3% when you remove the WCHA games. That's a pretty big disparity. In addition, 3 goals or more brought a winning percentage of 84.6% in conference play, versus 78.6% across NCAA play. Although not as statistically significant as the other gap, it still means 3 is more than enough in the WCHA. The question is, will the WCHA take steps to address the lack of scoring, or just say, "We have great goaltenders and coaches"? Because I have a hard time believing our goaltenders and coaches are that much better than those in other leagues.

The question is whether this is a trend or merely a reflection of the fact that the league lost a lot of scoring talent in the 2015 offseason. UAH not getting goals certainly explains the terrible records. That year they didn't even get to a goal a game ...

GFM

WeAreNDHockey
04-17-2016, 10:36 AM
Can't wait for the kind of hockey we'll be enjoying when the line of demarcation between winning and losing finds its way to 2 goals and then, eventually, to 1. OK that is slightly tongue in cheek. Slightly. But anyone who has been watching the game long enough has seen how much the game has changed over the course of the last generation.

Tactics and equipment have made this a game where preventing goals is far more important than scoring them. In the 1980s a skater going to the ice to block a shot was rare enough to be extremely noteworthy. Now barely a thought is given when one does it. Credit full facemasks and much lighter and effective padding for that. A generation ago the dimensions of a goalie in full gear was not that different than the other players. Now, goalies have equipment that is comically large and most goalies appear to be effectively square shaped. And again, lighter and much more effective equipment has led to a vast improvement in goaltending. 1970s goalie gear was heavier and absorbed a lot more sweat than it does today. Going to the ice and quickly getting back up was a much different task for Ken Dryden than it is for Thatcher Demko. There is a reason almost all goalies back in the day were "stand-up" goalies.

As goal scoring has gotten harder and harder, much more emphasis has been placed on developing one guy on the ice than on five. Goalies get much more training and coaching in 2016 than they did in 1986. At ALL levels of the game. Coaching tactics and game planning have changed radically as well. Easy access to video on any team has made it so much easier for coaches to develop specific game plans tailor made to the team they are facing.

My perception is the trend towards becoming a completely defensive game really took off in the late 1990s in the NHL and by the dawn of the 21st century in the NCAA. Even in 1993, dubbed the year of the overtime in the NHL playoffs with a still record 28 playoff games decided after regulation, not a single game went three OTs and only 6 even went into a second. Between 1930 and 2015 there have been 50 NHL playoff games that have gone 3 or more overtimes. 21 of them were played from 1930 through 1995. Since 1996 there have been 29. 21 in 66 seasons and 29 in 20 season since or from 1 every 3rd season or so to more than one per season.

While only an opinion, I think it is a much more boring game now than it was 20 or 30 years ago. Much more regimented, one dimensional and stale. I'm willing to bet the term "hot goalie" was coined sometime after 1995 when reasons were discussed as to team winning streaks or success in the post season. Basketball took the highly radical step of instituting a shot clock when the powers that be in both the pro and college games felt scoring was getting far too low and game play far too conservative. To a lessor extent, the 3-point shot was instituted for the same reasons, most noticably by the old ABA, then the NBA in 1979 and finally NCAA-wide in 1986 for the college game. Both of these ideas were considered fairly radical when adopted. Hockey has done nothing remotely radical in my lifetime of following the sport to increase scoring.

I'd do three things right now. First, make all minor penalties a full two minutes. You get called for hooking, you go off for 2 minutes. If the other guys score a PP goal, you stay in the box. Just like during a major penalty. Secondly, I'd remove players from the ice for all penalties. No 5X5 with 6 guys in the boxes for coincidentals or after the whistle scrums. I cannot remember the last time I saw any three on three in the game. (and no I'm not talking about the OTs in the NHL or the NCHC). 3 on 3 hockey is chaotic, exciting, and harder to coach. And 4x4 hockey is also more wide open and favors a team that relies more on skillful passing, skating and offensive minded hockey. Third, I'd shrink the da m n padding on the goalies. The padding needs to be able to offer sufficient protection to the netminder and nothing more. They've got the big stick, they've got the big gloves, they get to cover the puck if they choose. At some point the evolution of the gear is going to leave the average goalie 5 feet wide. Which means they'll only have to be able to move back and forth 6 inches in either direction and scoring will be impossible.

None of this is going to happen of course. I eagerly await the day when we have to postpone game two of a series because we have yet to get in a winner in game one because after the 23rd OT we've yet to see a goal.

Sean Pickett
04-18-2016, 01:03 PM
In the 70/80's how many teams had team-GAAs below 2.50? They were few and far between. Today, most every league has at lest 3 goalies with sub-2 GAAs. And a sub-2 GAA is not the guarantee of a gaudy W-L record, either.A while back someone posted requesting an annual NCAA scoring leader list and I was able to put together one back to the 1940-41 season (corrections still welcome). When you mentioned this I looked around for an annual NCAA goaltending leaders list and only found one by the NCAA back to the 1995-96 season. Using The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter, the ECAC Hockey 2015-16 Media Guide and WCHA 2015-16 Records Book, I was able to get back to the 1955-56 season with only a few seasons missing. I have combined the goaltending leaders with my previous points leaders in a new NCAA Annual Leaders (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UKflvViehXkrga6dcQhbGhq5xFgs5-JOvP-jR1uoyCI/edit?usp=sharing) workbook. Leaders in red still need more research to confirm they are the leaders for that season, but they are the best I have found so far (corrections are requested, as is additional information where missing). Currently only once between 1971-72 and 1996-97 (26 seasons) was the lowest GAA below 2.00 (Bob Essensa in 1984-85). The change in goaltending occurred between 1994-98 as GAA dropped below 2.00 and save percentage increased above 0.930 (and where both have stayed for the past 19 seasons) for the leading goalies.

Sean

fr. joe
04-18-2016, 05:49 PM
A while back someone posted requesting an annual NCAA scoring leader list and I was able to put together one back to the 1940-41 season (corrections still welcome). When you mentioned this I looked around for an annual NCAA goaltending leaders list and only found one by the NCAA back to the 1995-96 season. Using The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter, the ECAC Hockey 2015-16 Media Guide and WCHA 2015-016 Records Book, I was able to get back to the 1955-56 season with only a few seasons missing. I have combined the goaltending leaders with my previous points leaders in a new NCAA Annual Leaders (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1UKflvViehXkrga6dcQhbGhq5xFgs5-JOvP-jR1uoyCI/edit?usp=sharing) workbook. Leaders in red still need more research to confirm they are the leaders for that season, but they are the best I have found so far (corrections are requested, as is additional information where missing). Currently only once between 1971-72 and 1996-97 (26 seasons) was the lowest GAA below 2.00 (Bob Essensa in 1984-85). The change in goaltending occurred between 1994-98 as GAA dropped below 2.00 and save percentage increased above 0.930 (and where both have stayed for the past 19 seasons) for the leading goalies.

Sean

Sean, thank you for your commitment to meticulous research.

The lower scoring over the last 20+ season, for me, has not diminished the game. I believe it remains as exciting as ever... perhaps for different reasons and a wider variety of things to appreciate. And as the scoring averages have declined, let me put out a point not supported by research but by observation. I think that the average margin of victory is less from '94/'95 to '15/'16 than in the period from '71/'72 to '93/'94. Making for a higher percentage of games that are competitive. Fewer laughers, more close games.

Comment?