With all the downtime in the offseason, I have decided to dig into NHL play-by-play data. One question that has been bouncing around my head is how the “long change” affects scoring rates. In the NHL, the long change is in effect during the second period, when teams are defending the goal on the far side of the ice, and players have to skate farther to get to the bench from the defensive zone.

It is only a difference of about 50 feet compared to changing lines in the first and third periods, but this makes it harder for teams to swap out lines on the fly. Players can get stuck on the ice, and shifts can turn into marathons, tiring out defenders. I’ve been curious if it changes scoring rates, though, so let’s take a closer look at how teams score during the first, second, and third periods to see if the long change has an impact.

Data is from all the regular-season games from the 2023-24 NHL season. In total, 8268 goals were scored and analyzed. Let’s dive in!!

Goals scored

Breaking the goals down by period shows that the most goals are scored in the third period. Since the long change is only in effect during the second period, you would think that in the first and third periods, the scoring would be similar.

The third period has its own special circumstance, though, as this is the time for teams that are losing to make a last-ditch effort to try and get the equalizer. This causes a surge in empty-net goals, which throws the numbers off a bit. There were 446 empty-net goals in the third period, which actually means 2349 goals were scored in the third period with a goaltender in the net. Surprisingly, 2349 goals is the exact number of goals scored in the first period as well. For this exercise, empty net, overtime, and shootout goals will be excluded.

This shows there is quite a boost in scoring during the second period, to the tune of a 17.2 percent increase or 403 goals. So this answers the base question, scoring rates are increased by a pretty significant percentage when the long change is in effect.

Additional data

Let’s take a look at the data one click down and consider how the goals are scored and if there are any trends. With periods one and three both having 2349 goals scored.

Playing situation

Depending on the point of the game, teams can be at even strength, on a manpower advantage, have their goalie pulled, or be shorthanded.

The main contributor for the second-period increase in goal scoring (307) is even strength, which is where the majority of all NHL goals are scored. Power-play goals were also up by 149 in the second period, which is the biggest category percentage jump at 30.9 percent. Due to more opportunities for the goaltender to be pulled in the third period, this causes a decrease in other goals. “Other” goals includes shorthanded, penalty shot, and goaltender-pulled goals.

Overall, you see 307 additional goals at even strength, 149 additional goals on the power play, and a decrease of 53 goals in other situations. That works out to an increase of 403 goals during the long change period.

Penalties

With power-play goals seeing the biggest category jump, let’s look at the number of penalties called.

Period two saw a 21.4 percent jump in the number of penalties called. What is interesting here is that is less than the percentage jump in the number of power-play goals scored (30.9 percent). This indicates there is a higher conversion rate of power plays during the second period.

Shot data

With more goals being scored, let’s look at the type of shots that are leading to goals. The shot data has been sorted into six buckets, consisting of wrist shot, snap shot, tip-in, slap shot, backhand, and other.

The wrist shot is by far the preferred shot selection of the NHL and accounts for 47.5 percent of all NHL goals scored. The wrist shot also saw a bump of 21.8 percent in the second period compared with the first and third periods, good for 240 goals. The tip-in goal was 22.2 percent more frequent in the second period, accounting for 70 goals.

Next, looking at the number of shot attempts, I expected to see a similar trend of an increase to go along with the added goals.

This is not the case, though, and shot attempts remain pretty flat between all periods. There is a small uptick of 3.7 percent, but that is a far cry from a 17.2 percent increase in goals. Perhaps this somewhat points to the increase in goals coming in situations where the goaltender has a vested interest in holding onto the puck to stop play so his teammates can get a line change.

Assist data

When a player scores a goal, it can be unassisted, have one assist, or two assists.

• Unassisted goals are a singular effort to get the goal.
• One-assist goals require one pass before the goal. Situations like 2-on-1’s, one-timers, and rebound goals result in one-assist goals.
• Two-assist goals require two passes before the goal. This is the most common scoring scenario and accounts for 77.8 percent of all NHL goals. A team controlling the puck in the offensive zone can result in two-assist goals.

With the long change, defensive teams can get stuck out on the ice, if the offensive team is controlling the puck in its zone. The assist data supports this, as the number of two-assist goals increased by 332 goals and 18.2 percent. One-assist goals increased by 16.6 percent and unassisted goals by 4.4 percent. This indicates teams are getting setup in the zone and connecting on more passes leading to an increase in two-assist goals.

Kraken data

Unfortunately, the Seattle Kraken were not good at scoring second-period goals. They are one of only two teams that does not realize this boost in offense. The other team is the Edmonton Oilers, but since they were fourth in the league in scoring overall, this fault gets swept under the rug. All 30 other teams score more goals in the second period than they do in the first period.

Team	Period 1 Goals	Period 2 Goals	Period 3 Goals
Seattle Kraken	72	65	74 (65 wo/ empty net goals)

The Seattle Kraken were the fourth-worst team in the NHL in goals scored with 214 goals on the season. Most teams have figured out how to capitalize on the long change and trap defending teams in their zone. As goal scoring was the Kraken’s main issue, improving on the long-change scoring could be a target for improvement in the upcoming season.

Looking back to the 2022-23 season, the Kraken had success scording during the second period, improving their offensive production by 24.4 percent in that period, to 107 goals.

Team 2022-23	Period 1 Goals	Period 2 Goals	Period 3 Goals
Seattle Kraken	86	107	87 (72 wo/ empty net goals)

Wrap up

I had alway heard the long change was difficult on defending teams, but had yet to see any numbers to back it up. There is definitely a surge in scoring during the second period. First-year Kraken coach Dan Bylsma has some work cut out to maximize on the scoring opportunities on the long change.

One note, this data was looking at regulation data, but note that overtime follows the same pattern. For first overtime in the playoffs, the teams have to deal with the long change in addition to already playing three periods of hockey.

If you made it through this article, thank you for reading; you might just like numbers as much as I do. If you have any thoughts, suggestions, or other takes, feel free to make a comment below. You can follow me on the X at @blaizg.