quantitative significant of short-handed goals allowed?

[gojetsgomoxies]

i'm looking at more hockey team analytics these days...... but don't follow hockey too closely (i am from canada and used to be huge fan as a kid)..

here's my generic question,

to handicap a hockey game, when you look at strength of each team's power play and short-handed play, would you count shorthanding goals as full value or would you discount them to randomness?

i.e. are shorthanded goals fairly random? not 100% random.

thx in advance

[Mike Huntertz]

IMHO
Too many other analytics that come into play with more weight. Time of possession % 5/5, Dangerous scoring chances %, goaltender, Shots etc.
So much of hockey is luck(the puck isn't a basketball and bounce true) that shorties are too tough to predict.

GL

[hehfest]

i'm looking at more hockey team analytics these days...... but don't follow hockey too closely (i am from canada and used to be huge fan as a kid)..

here's my generic question,

to handicap a hockey game, when you look at strength of each team's power play and short-handed play, would you count shorthanding goals as full value or would you discount them to randomness?

i.e. are shorthanded goals fairly random? not 100% random.

thx in advance

No way. Short-handed goals way too insignificant to bother with. Do you incorporate time off, playing next day, distance of travel as well? There is so much you could put into it all really. Just curious to see how you cap the games. Empty netters is the real tough part of the game. I like a lot of teams +1.5 goals but then that empty net factor can destroy that so many times where I just can't trust puck line like that.