Sunday, February 8, 2009

Fighting and team performance in the NHL: No relationship on the scoreboard or the financial statement


 

There has been some long overdue evaluation about fighting in the NHL recently. I suspect part of this self-reflection has been spurred on by internal legal counsel. But there is some conversation about the role of fighting in hockey. Is there a relationship between fighting and regular season performance? Is fighting tolerated to boost fan interest which translates into more money for teams? Let's take a statistical valuation approach and stick with the team overall +/- as the best indicator of team performance:

The figures are taken from the 2008-09 season a little past the half-way point (the games played are between 46 and 49):

Team

Major Penalties

+/-

Boston Bruins

27

64

San Jose Sharks

24

50

Chicago Blackhawks

39

41

Detroit Red Wings

7

36

Nashville Predators

38

25

Philadelphia Flyers

52

16

Washington Capitals

16

15

Montreal Canadiens

25

15

Minnesota Wild

28

8

Calgary Flames

40

8

Vancouver Canucks

51

5

Florida Panthers

22

1

Pittsburgh Penguins

27

-2

Buffalo Sabres

22

-2

Anaheim Ducks

47

-2

Columbus Blue Jackets

34

-3

New York Rangers

34

-4

Edmonton Oilers

39

-6

Los Angeles Kings

27

-11

Phoenix Coyotes

32

-12

Colorado Avalanche

30

-15

Ottawa Senators

21

-18

Carolina Hurricanes

17

-19

Tampa Bay Lightning

24

-19

St Louis Blues

46

-19

Dallas Stars

31

-22

New Jersey Devils

28

-22

Toronto Maple Leafs

28

-29

Atlanta Thrashers

33

-30

New York Islanders

27

-49


 

There is no relationship between the performance of a team of a team and major penalties (the correlation coefficient between majors and +/- is -0.03). That might of surprise to some but maybe not. Consider which players seem to sit in the press box when the playoffs come.

So if fighting has nothing to do with the on-ice performance of a team, is it used deliberately to manufacture fan interest with financially struggling US teams? Is there a relationship between the financial performance of a team and the use of fighting? Let's take a look at both:

Country

Average count of fights per team

Canada

34

USA

30


 

So it isn't US teams driving up the fights.

If we use the Forbes financial evaluation of teams and compare that to fighting majors, we can explore the relationship between fighting and the financial condition of the team:

Team

Value (Mill)

Revenue (Mill)

2008-09 Major Penalties

Toronto Maple Leafs

$ 448

$ 160

28

New York Rangers

$ 411

$ 137

34

Montreal Canadiens

$ 334

$ 139

25

Detroit Red Wings

$ 303

$ 110

7

Philadelphia Flyers

$ 275

$ 102

52

Dallas Stars

$ 273

$ 105

31

Boston Bruins

$ 263

$ 97

27

Vancouver Canucks

$ 236

$ 107

51

Colorado Avalanche

$ 231

$ 91

30

New Jersey Devils

$ 222

$ 97

28

Minnesota Wild

$ 217

$ 94

28

Los Angeles Kings

$ 210

$ 91

27

Ottawa Senators

$ 207

$ 96

21

Chicago Blackhawks

$ 205

$ 79

39

Calgary Flames

$ 203

$ 97

40

Anaheim Ducks

$ 202

$ 90

47

Tampa Bay Lightning

$ 200

$ 84

24

Pittsburgh Penguins

$ 195

$ 87

27

San Jose Sharks

$ 179

$ 85

24

Edmonton Oilers

$ 175

$ 85

39

Buffalo Sabres

$ 169

$ 76

22

Carolina Hurricanes

$ 168

$ 75

17

Nashville Predators

$ 164

$ 70

38

Florida Panthers

$ 163

$ 74

22

St Louis Blues

$ 162

$ 73

46

Washington Capitals

$ 160

$ 73

16

Atlanta Thrashers

$ 158

$ 70

33

Columbus Blue Jackets

$ 157

$ 71

34

New York Islanders

$ 154

$ 64

27

Phoenix Coyotes

$ 142

$ 68

32


 

There is no relationship between the financial value of a team and fighting nor is there a relationship between revenue and fighting. So teams that are in financial distress are not resorting to fighting to boost local interest.

The table below compares the year-to-year correlation coefficient relationship for major penalties by team:

 

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2005-06

  

0.43

0.39

0.48

2006-07

  

  

0.44

0.54

2007-08

  

  

  

0.72

2008-09

  

  

  

  


 

What this means is that there tends to be a strong relationship between 2007-08 major penalties and 2008-09 penalties. While not a given, teams that fight one year tend to fight the next.

OK, so if fighting doesn't help a team win on the ice or in the box office, what is going on here?

From the NHL perspective, it is really unclear as to why fighting is essentially encouraged. It could be eliminated over night with a few rule changes without any obvious impact at the team performance or local level. Is there a concern that in eliminating fighting that the NHL television ratings would be negatively impacted? But if it is true that the TV viewers are deciding whether to tune in or not based on the expectation of a fight, then this would be a legitimate financial consideration. But i don't have access to TV viewership and the % of highlight content devoted to fights. Does the ESPNs/TSN/SportsNet devote a disproportionate amount of their air-time highlights to fighting? I don't know, but that's the only scenario that makes sense to this Hockey Outsider.


 


 

No comments:

Post a Comment