How NHL teams have optimized power-plays to generate more goal scoring

As it stands right now, the Toronto Maple Leafs are having a great year on the power-play, operating with a success rate of just under 25 per cent. Going back to the very early 1980s, their only seasons better or equal to that percentage were last season (better), and in 2017-18 (about equal). So yeah, not bad to have one of their best power-plays in their past 30 years.

What’s strange though, is that a 25 per cent success rate doesn’t get you as far as it used to around the NHL, in the same way that the value of a paycheck is diminished by inflation over time — you eventually need more just to keep pace. Five years ago in 2017-18, Toronto's 25 per cent success rate was second in the NHL in power-play percentage. This season, they sit 12^th at 24.1 per cent (the Minnesota Wild are ninth at exactly 25 per cent).

Teams around the NHL are having more power-play success than they used to. Here’s where 25 per cent would see a team finish in terms of league rank going back to 2010 (full disclosure: I picked an arbitrary cut-off to keep the table at a reasonable length!):

Here’s where league-wide power-play percentages have gone over that same time frame (far right column):

So far this season (no small sample size), the league is scoring on the power-play over 22.2 per cent of the time, a figure that would’ve led the league in 2011-12.

With power-play opportunities being a little higher this season, you can see that more PP goals are being scored right now than at any point over the past 15 years.

So, why is this? What do you think has changed to increase the danger of power-plays across the league going back only 12 years?

Here’s where we get into the opinion portion of this because I’m not sure there’s one clean answer, as much as we’d like there to be.

First, not that long ago, the best power-play plans were ideas like, “Load up Shea Weber or PK Subban for big one-timers” which led to a ton of shots from distance. Often, that was Plan 1A that the top PP unit was trying to generate. Big bombs from the point certainly had (and have) value, but they’re just less likely to go in than shots from closer, or those from the flanks (particularly when deception is employed at the top and the goalie can’t anticipate which flank will be shooting), or those from the slot, or those down by the net. You get the point.

The other form of optimization here is that teams almost exclusively operate with four forwards and one defenceman, rather than the two D-men that came with nearly every PP unit not long ago. That means more teams are playing more offensively-focused players, which translates to more goals. It also means that when there are point shots, they’re more likely to be from the middle of the rink, rather than when teams would have two D up top above the circles.

So, we’ve got less D on the ice and less “bomb it from distance” as a strategy, which bears out in the numbers. SportLogiq has data on this going back to 2016, and since then you can see the sharp decline on the table below. What you’re seeing is shot attempts by defencemen on the power-play, per two minutes (data courtesy SportLogiq):

Again, those numbers are “per two minutes.” So, if a team has 3-4 power-plays in a game, we’re talking about six-to-eight less rips from the top per game. Seeing as shot attempts on the power-play aren’t down over that time, we know they’re just being re-located to better scoring areas.

There’s also the exponential rise in video work which sees teams focus on picking apart defensive weaknesses, watching other teams to figure out what works in creating more touches for their best players, and more looks to shoot. Teams also prioritize getting shots off passes, as the value of making goaltenders move becomes even more greatly appreciated.

Further to the video work and finding of efficiencies, there’s also the increased success of breakouts at getting into the zone and set-up. As much as fans get annoyed by the drop-pass on the breakout, it’s not like 32 teams have dumb coaches who are getting this all wrong. The drop forces teams to either allow the puck carrier a chance by not respecting their speed, or they have to back off, getting stuck flat-footed as the puck gets dropped and then comes at them fast. It doesn’t always work, but it works enough to be a staple of PP breakouts everywhere. Better breakouts equal more sustained O-zone time with the puck, which equals more goals.

Some smaller, related hypotheses: shooting, in general, has caught up to and passed goaltending. Save percentages have plummeted in recent years, dropping from a league average of .915 at one point to .905 this season. Again, far right category here:

Skill has become a priority in the sport, shooters are better than ever, and it’s making the game hard for the masked men between the pipes. Even defencemen now — particularly those who play PP1 — are basically forwards that stand just a bit farther from the offensive net. I think goaltending is getting harder for a number of reasons, but part of my theory there is that everybody being a tandem means you no longer see the 30-some best goalies starting damn-near all the time, but instead see the 60-some best goalies half the time, which dilutes the pool a bit (and keeps roughly nobody in rhythm).

All of these are just theories, in the end. But there’s no denying the truth that power-plays are scoring at a higher rate than ever, so teams must get better just to keep pace. When you get into the playoffs and goal scoring gets a little bit harder, having a great power-play becomes an even bigger advantage.

At this point, scoring on one out of every four power-plays barely gets you in the top-10 in the league. If you’re much worse than that, you’re falling behind and suddenly there’s a disproportionate amount of pressure on your team to produce at 5-on-5.