It’s no secret that the Montreal Canadiens have had penalty issues this season. After going through the Canadiens’ penalties drawn and taken this season, we found that there are some areas that appear to be significant outliers compared to the expectations we have about how NHL games are officiated.
About a month has passed, and I’ve scraped together enough time over the holidays and in the new year to track every game for each Atlantic Division team up to January 14th in the same way I tracked the Canadiens.
Previously, it appeared weird that the Canadiens’ penalty differentials did not seem to align with how the NHL manages games, but we were working on assumptions with only a single team tracked. While it appeared very odd on the surface that through 34 games played the Canadiens were receiving a lower percentage of the power plays while trailing in games, there’s no way to be definitive without other examples to draw from.
However, that assumption appears to be correct.
Identifying game management trends
I want to tread carefully, because with eight teams and over 2700 penalties tracked, we’re still only operating with one quarter of the NHL and with just over half of a season played, but the results are consistent enough so far that there are a few trends that appear to be true in the NHL this season.
When the score is tied, 10.4% of the penalties called in games for Atlantic Division teams are coincidental, resulting in no power play for either team. When the score is not tied, that number nearly doubles: just a hair under 20% of calls when one team has a lead are coincidental in nature.
Regardless of score, the proportion of coincidental penalties also rises as games progress, from 10.9% in the first period, to 16.7% in the second period, to 23.8% in the third period. This could have more to do with the temperature of the game than anything else; there will be more emotion on the ice when one team has a lead, and as time ticks off the clock players and teams are naturally going to increase the intensity.
However, I believe you can also make the inference that referees don’t want to ‘have an impact’ on the game as the situations become higher leverage, so they’re more hesitant to make a call one way or the other, leading to a higher percentage of coincidental minors. That isn’t just a psychological assumption, because having tracked penalty calls by period, we can also see that the game is officiated differently as it progresses.
In the Atlantic Division, penalties are called in the first two periods at nearly identical rates (6.59 power plays per 60 minutes shared between both teams), but in the third period there is a 16.9% drop in power plays (not counting coincidental minors here). This fits well with what our eyes see game by game.
This isn’t automatically bad. There will be many hockey fans who prefer fewer penalty calls as games progress, though I find the idea of changing what is and isn’t a penalty based on the time on the clock to be an utter absurdity, personally.
What is a bit more questionable is how the NHL appears to apply its officiating as if we were playing Mario Kart instead of professional hockey.
When an Atlantic team is trailing, they receive a 19.4% bump in power plays awarded and their opponents receive 1.8% fewer power plays, while leading teams see their power-play opportunities drop by 15.5%, and their opponents increase by 16%. By proportion of power plays given, Atlantic Division teams earn 50.3% of the power plays when the score is tied, 54.1% when they are trailing, and 46% when they’re leading.
Score effects are known to exist, so playing style does change based on the score of the game, however it is difficult to separate how much a team can push while trailing from a general knowledge that there will be more leeway from officials on infractions. Penalties exist because breaking the rules of the game can give you an advantage, so do teams who are trailing draw more calls because they’re pushing play more, or can they push play more effectively because they can get away with more and know it? Those factors are extremely difficult to separate.
Habs vs. Atlantic Division
It appears game management exists, but the question on the minds of Habs fans everywhere isn’t whether something most of us know is occurring is real or imagined, it’s a simple, fan driven one: Are the Canadiens getting screwed over?
Of the eight teams I’ve tracked so far, only the Montreal Canadiens and Ottawa Senators get a lower percentage of the power plays while trailing in games than they do when the score is tied, though the Senators still get a majority, and they are unique in that they also draw a majority of the power plays while leading.
The Canadiens are the only team in the Atlantic that received fewer than half of the power plays while they’re trailing in games. Even the Boston Bruins, who have an atrocious penalty differential and don’t even get close to half the calls when the score is tied still get half of the calls when they’re behind. The Canadiens seem to be on an island when it comes to not benefiting from the game management of NHL officials.
Separating power plays by period is a little different, with the distribution being much more random than by score. By score, almost every team saw their share of power plays increase while trailing and decrease while leading. By period, the Senators don’t see much change at all, the Leafs see their odds increase as games drag on, the Red Wings don’t like the second period despite heavily favourable results in the first and third, the Bruins feel the same about the second period, but don’t get an advantage anywhere, while the Panthers and Lightning would rather avoid first periods. The Sabres and Canadiens meanwhile, really don’t like the third period.
That’s a lot of disparate profiles in one division, which makes sense because in general periods shouldn’t dictate which team is getting called, but individual teams can have issues.
While other teams see similar random drops in their penalty distribution, the Canadiens in the third period have the lowest share of any of the teams in any period, and by far the largest drop in the percentage of power plays received in their outlier period compared to the other 40 minutes of games.
The Red Wings and Bruins see their ability to control special teams play drop by 16.4% and 16.9%, respectively, in the second period, while the Sabres see a 20.1% drop from the first 40 minutes to the third. The Canadiens meanwhile see a 26.4% drop in the third period.
For a team with a reputation for third-period heroics, ranking sixth in the league with 59 goals in the final frame, that’s strange.
Another advantage of tracking the whole division is we can find averages and make rudimentary relative stats to show how different a team’s results are from the rest.
These aren’t true relative metrics, because we’re comparing within division only due to convenience instead of across the entire league, but they’re still illustrative of the differences each team sees in how their games are officiated.
The Bruins for example, have the worst penalty differential in the NHL and it shows. In every score state, they’re getting way below division-average results. The Bruins and Maple Leafs are the two slowest teams in the division, and both get sunk by high sticks and trips more than anything else.
Boston has the largest negative single situation outlier, with a power-play differential 8.72 percentage points lower than the division average while the score is tied, while the Senators have the largest positive single situation outlier, getting 10.18 percentage points more than than the division average while leading, strangely.
On average, Atlantic Division teams receive just under 46% of the power plays while leading, including Ottawa, which receives over 54% of the power plays in that situation. They’re the only team in the division who receives more power plays while leading than their opponents.
The Detroit Red Wings are the top power play differential team while the score is tied, and receive the second-highest outlier relative to the division with a 10.02 percentage-point increase over the division average while trailing, earning 64.0% of the calls while their opponents have a lead.
Concerning Montreal, we can see that the Habs have the second-largest negative outlier relative to their own division, with their penalty differential while trailing in games being 8.57 percentage points lower than the average in the Atlantic. The Canadiens also don’t get much help while leading, but that gap is very similar to other teams, like Detroit and Toronto, so I don’t believe it’s statistically significant.
What about by period?
The Canadiens’ third-period penalty troubles are the largest single period outlier in the division, followed closely by Boston in the second period. However, while the Bruins are heavily in the negatives everywhere, the Canadiens once again are about average through the first 40 minutes, then incredibly poor at drawing and taking penalties in the third period.
While the score is tied, and through the first 40 minutes overall, the Canadiens’ results speak to a team that draws and takes a lot of calls, but ends up mostly even. If they’re average in most situations, why do things turn against them so heavily when they’re trailing? Why is the third period so heavily tilted against them? We know that the third period differentials aren’t a score effect, as in the third period the Canadiens receive just 35% of the power plays while the game is tied, 33% while trailing, and 40% while leading, so the poor penalty differential is occurring regardless of score.
Can this be rationally explained?
Previously, I mentioned that youth and size can factor into penalty calls, and while I’m not prepared to dismiss those factors in the Canadiens’ officiating results this season, I don’t yet have the data to make any inferences on how big an impact those traits have in the NHL. Considering the Canadiens’ results while the score is tied and through the first 40 minutes of games overall, I lean toward size and youth not being the key to explaining what’s going on here.
One question I’ve heard asked is whether the Canadiens’ spent an inordinate amount of time trailing, since they have a reputation for comeback victories. Time spent in certain situations can certainly impact the overall differentials, so let’s quickly take a look at the Atlantic Division and see if that’s the case.
As it turns out, our assumptions about the Canadiens trailing a lot are incorrect! Only the Lightning and Maple Leafs trail less often than Montreal does, and the Canadiens spend the most time with the score tied of any team in the division. The Lightning’s penalty differentials are somewhat explained by this though, as they spend the least time trailing, and a gargantuan amount of time leading.
Time spent in different situations doesn’t give us answers, but what about actual play on the ice? Maybe the Habs get frantic in third periods? Maybe they lose their cool worse than most teams? Maybe while trailing, the Canadiens aren’t controlling the puck enough to draw calls?
Drawing calls is the biggest factor in why the Canadiens’ penalty differential is so rough while trailing and in third periods. While the Canadiens draw 3.57 power plays per 60 minutes in the first and second periods, they draw only 1.66 power plays per 60 minutes in third periods, a 53.6% drop. Meanwhile, the Atlantic Division average not including the Canadiens is 2.87 power plays per 60 minutes in the third period. While trailing, the Canadiens draw 2.76 power plays per 60 minutes, far lower than the average of 3.86 power plays per 60 for the division average without them.
With the Canadiens drawing just 58% of the average power plays in the third, and 72% of the average penalties drawn while trailing, they would have to be considerably poor in those situations to justify the results, but that just isn’t the case. Tracking shot attempts, shots, goals, and expected goals through Natural Stat Trick, the Canadiens are a slightly above-average team while the score is tied, and slightly below average when leading and trailing.
Interestingly enough, there doesn’t appear to be much correlation at all between controlling puck possession, shots, goals, or expected goals, and penalty differential. A sample of eight teams over half a season isn’t close to enough data to say this definitively, but based on what I have available, it barely seems like a factor at all.
For example, Tampa Bay is one of the most dominant teams in the NHL while the score is tied, controlling 60% of the shot attempts and 58% of the expected goals, but receiving just 49% of the power plays. Buffalo meanwhile, is a 44% xG and shot-attempt team while tied, but receives 55% of the power plays.
If the Canadiens were taking way more calls in these situations instead of not drawing calls, or if their control of play withered and it appeared that they could not apply enough pressure to their opponents to force officials into taking calls, it would be much easier to accept the idea that they are uniquely lacking in these areas and earning the results they get. The evidence we have available doesn’t support that.
So, are the Habs getting jobbed?
I don’t think very highly of the way the NHL executes its rule enforcement, but I don’t think it’s rational to believe that there is intent to screw over an individual team. There are certainly consequences for teams in the short term when certain actions are taken, and some teams are vulnerable to specific rule crackdowns that might have nothing to do with actual actions. But long-term, targeted, punitive action against a specific team? Maybe I’m not conspiracy-brained enough, but it doesn’t make sense to me.
However, whether it’s intentional or not, the facts on the ground are undeniable that the Canadiens are not receiving the game-management push that teams do in general. What that amounts to in opportunity cost compared to the average of the Atlantic Division does matter.
Factoring in Montreal’s ability to draw calls in the first 40 minutes compared to the rest of the division, if that trend continued into the third period on a relative scale to the division average, the Habs would have expected an extra 22 power plays in the third period, resulting in about four extra power-play goals.
In trailing situations, if the Canadiens were drawing calls at the same rate as the rest of the division, it would also mean an extra 22 power plays and four extra goals. Those situations overlap a bit, with about 20% of the infractions called while the Canadiens are trailing occurring in third periods, so let’s call it 6 extra power-play goals overall, which amounts to about one extra win in the NHL.
That’s not a huge amount, although I would argue that there are downstream effects of not being able to draw calls in high-leverage situations, especially when your opponents have no problems the other way around.
What is undeniable is that the Canadiens have had to fight through a very odd situation in regards to penalties, and this young, inexperienced team with inconsistent goaltending has consistently found ways to win anyway.
What’s next?
For the Canadiens, this is probably something they should escalate behind the scenes with the league. Not necessarily accusatorily, but to ask what may be going on here and how they can improve as a team. I don’t believe a caustic relationship with the NHL’s officials is a good idea.
Internally, the Canadiens’ biggest problems in terms of penalties come from hooks, holds, high sticks, slashes, and cross-checks. Among these calls, they’ve drawn just 71 penalties and taken 97, so stick discipline might be something the coaching staff wants to stress. However, the bigger issue remains drawing calls more than taking them.
Focusing on special-teams improvement is also smart. The power play has been generally good, but runs hot and cold, sitting at eighth in the league at 23.9%. The penalty kill has struggled at times, especially with Kaiden Guhle missing 39 games since he has been the Canadiens’ best penalty-killing defender for multiple seasons. But before the last couple of games it had been incredible for a stretch, bringing the team into the middle of the pack at 80.6% and 20th place.
For my part, I’m going to continue expanding this dataset, and as I mentioned previously I’ll be posting it publicly here. The calculations won’t be on every page because it doesn’t copy/paste well from excel to a google doc, but I’ve included the math I’m using on the Montreal tab so everything is available for scrutiny or correction. As always, I’m not infallible so if you find mistakes, don’t feel shy about telling me.
Notes
- I thought the Habs took and drew a lot of roughing calls (62 total) until I tracked the Lightning (103) and Panthers (84). Tampa has taken almost as many roughing calls (57) as the Habs have seen for both teams in their games.
- The most common penalty in the Atlantic this year is tripping with 587 infractions.
- Montreal has the best penalty differential in tripping calls specifically at 64% in their favour. Toronto is the worst at 38%.
- Removing coincidental roughs, Buffalo has drawn a whopping 67% of the power plays among roughing calls specifically, drawing 14 and taking just 5.
- Boston and Florida appear to be the worst for running interference, tied with 24 calls against each, about double the division average.
- Montreal leads the division in hooking penalties with 28, something to keep an eye on.
Andrew Berkshire is the former managing editor of Eyes on the Prize, and the founder of Game Over Network Inc. A Canadian, employee-owned sports media startup focused on platforming young creators across the country. Find Andrew live on YouTube after Habs games with Game Over Montreal, where you can also find Marc Dumont, Kay Imam, and Conor Tomalty to bring you interactive postgame analysis. You can join the Game Over Network’s Discord, and support us on Patreon as we employ over 30 young sports journalists and analysts across Canada’s seven NHL markets.
Social Media links: [Bluesky] [TikTok] [Instagram] [Threads] [Facebook] [LinkedIn]
