A Brief Look at Fighting & NHL Attendance
I had grand plans for this study, where I would juxtapose teams with "Ice Girls" versus those without, and attendance figures both pre- and post-"Ice Girl", in addition to these numbers on fighting, just for a little glimpse on possible draws outside of the hockey itself. Unfortunately, if you can believe it, it's hard to find a reliable history on "first years" for the Ice Girls on each respective team. I was pretty sceptical that they would make a major impact on attendance anyway.
Cutting my losses (not a complete loss, I got to browse Ice Girl sites), I decided just to do a basic study taking the attendance figures from ESPN (which date back to 2000-01) and put them alongside team fighting ranks and team points ranks to see if either bore fruit. I'd always felt that fighting would stick around as much for its attendance draw as anything else; now I'm not so sure.
This is simply comparing ranks, 1 through 30, though I might pick around the data at a later date to look at changes in attendance and changes in some of these other variables from one year to the next. As it stands, what we're looking at below is I'm holding the first rank static across the period, and looking at how the second rank might fluctuate or remain the same over that same period. For instance, starting at the left on the horizontal axis, I'm looking at the varying attendance ranks for the teams that finished 1st in number of fights, then 2nd in fights, then 3rd, and so on.
That being said, the visuals from 9 years of data:
Just for kicks, and since I had the data, I decided to put together this last one too.
So, just on the surface level, fighting doesn't seem to have a major impact in either a positive or negative fashion for attendance (though I think the jury's still out on standings). It doesn't rule out that a Charlestown Chiefs-like development wouldn't draw some crowds, but I'd have my doubts that it would sustain higher attendance levels in the long run.
It would also be fair to say that team performance very likely matters more than fighting when it comes to attendance. The only bizarre quirk in these data is the downward spike on the top graph, where for whatever reason coming in 4th in the league in fights just so happened to also be the spot where successful teams were positioned.
I'm putzing around with similar data from a few of the minor leagues, so I'll have a couple more posts of this ilk in the next week or so.
Thanks to ESPN for the home attendance numbers and hockeyfights.com for the data on donnybrooks.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Interesting. I wonder why he only looked at one season? What I was finding was that one season wasn’t going to be a rich enough data set.
That being said, it would be interesting for him to do the study again, including hits-per-game as part of his “violence” variable.
Does he call it Luongo underwear?
Writer at Behind the Net: www.behindthenethockey.com
by Bettman's Nightmare on Dec 2, 2010 11:33 AM EST up reply actions
You obviously haven’t watched Slapshot if you don’t think there’s a link between fighting and winning, or fighting and attendance. :)
Actually, I’m finding a bit of data supporting the idea that it works in some of the lower leagues. I don’t want to get too specific, because I likes me a juicy story.
Does he call it Luongo underwear?
Writer at Behind the Net: www.behindthenethockey.com
by Bettman's Nightmare on Dec 2, 2010 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
You overlooked a tremendous NHL marketing opportunity
Ice Girl Fights.
On the Forecheck is SB Nation's blog covering the Preds (be sure to check out my discount offer on Nashville Predators tickets). Catch me on Twitter at @Forechecker, or join our legions on Facebook at Facebook.com/OnTheForecheck.
Ha, then Sather will sign Doris Boogaard and the parity will be shot until every league has one Ice Girl goon to do the “dirty work.” To say nothing of the possibility that one team might deploy The Fabulous Moolah.

Does he call it Luongo underwear?
Writer at Behind the Net: www.behindthenethockey.com
by Bettman's Nightmare on Dec 2, 2010 11:41 AM EST up reply actions
Damn, she’s not alive. R.I.P. What about Mae Young?

Does he call it Luongo underwear?
Writer at Behind the Net: www.behindthenethockey.com
by Bettman's Nightmare on Dec 2, 2010 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
Hell, give me a 5 minute major…I was searching for them.
Does he call it Luongo underwear?
Writer at Behind the Net: www.behindthenethockey.com
by Bettman's Nightmare on Dec 2, 2010 12:34 PM EST up reply actions
Please also consider stadium geography
Wendorf,
You schmuck… As an economist and statistician, I have to say I was disappointed with this analysis. One of the key factors that determine’s sporting event attendance is commute time. This phenomenon is called the density equation—in short teams that have arenas right downtown are more likely to draw more attendance than those that are out of town. I think this phenomenon needs to be explored. The New Jersey Devils were struggling to get attendance even while they were winning cups—the Phoenix Coyotes are bankrupt, I think, largely because their arena is 30 miles outside of downtown. The New York Islanders have the double-edged sword of a suburban rink and a dreadful team. Look at the Tampa Bay Rays in baseball, arguably the best team in baseball for the last three years—and they can’t even sell out a playoff game.
I would be interesting to see how suburban/urban stadiums affect attendance—and then overlay the winning percentages.
wEagz
That’s the next step that I wanted to do, actually, was to take the surrounding population into account as well, make it into a multiple regression kind of thing. Haven’t thought about commute. I’d argue, though, that the middle graph suggests that if a team’s winning, people will find a way to get there (you bring up the Devils, but the Coyotes attendance figures jumped last year when they played well).
Does he call it Luongo underwear?
Writer at Behind the Net: www.behindthenethockey.com
by Bettman's Nightmare on Dec 2, 2010 1:47 PM EST up reply actions
What about using percentage change in attendance as your variable and regress it against percentage change in points and percentage change in fighting majors.
This would control for teams that have crappy or amazing attendance regardless of their wins or fighting. I am thinking that teams like Toronto or the NYR consistently have high attendance, regardless of the number of wins. If you instead show a correlation between increased winning or increased fighting and increased attendance, that might be more telling than just the rankings.
Yeah, the more I set up my data in this way, the more I thought about precisely what you’re suggesting. That’s why, as you can see, I wasn’t committing to the results completely in the post. I’m going to work with Ben a bit on getting some weights from population and commute, and then I can toss in those percent changes.
Does he call it Luongo underwear?
Co-Manager at Behind the Net
by Bettman's Nightmare on Dec 3, 2010 2:42 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, please consider geography
The Jobbing.com arena in Glendale is only 18 miles from the arena in downtown PHX. 30 miles, you say? Ya missed by THAT much!
by Larry_in_PHX on Dec 4, 2010 12:24 AM EST up reply actions
How much of a difference is there on average between the top fighting teams and the bottom fighting teams? Obviously the difference in wins between top and bottom is fairly drastic, but I can’t believe fights are that variable.
The average difference between top and bottom across those 9 years is just a hair over 59 fights.
Does he call it Luongo underwear?
Co-Manager at "Behind the Net":http://www.behindthenethockey.com/
by Bettman's Nightmare on Dec 3, 2010 1:05 AM EST up reply actions

by 


















