| Position | Goals Scored | Total Players |
|---|---|---|
| C | 3516 | 252 |
| L | 1859 | 133 |
| R | 1741 | 123 |
| D | 1208 | 243 |
A Look into the Efficiency and Context of NHL Scoring
Introduction
This analysis explores hockey goal scoring efficiency in the NHL and then also incorporating the collegiate NCAA level later on. I’ll be examining who scores, how they score, and whether they score more or less than expected.
NHL data was collected from MoneyPuck for the 2024-25 season, containing data on the roughly 120,000 shot attempts during that season. The fields collected in this data are quite extensive, 137 total, so rather than listing them all, the MoneyPuck data dictionary can be found here: Download data dictionary.
NCAA data was scraped from QuantHockey from the 2014-15 season through 2024-25. This data is much simpler than the MoneyPuck data; it only contains fields such as goals, assists, points, shooting percentage, team, game-winning-goals, etc. (pretty much the basic “back of the hockey card” data). For the purposes of comparing NCAA players to NHL production, I’ve only collected the top 50 point scorers from each season. While there are obviously far more than 50 NCAA players each season, I’m just using this sample because they will have the best chance of being drafted into the NHL and thus appearing in the MoneyPuck NHL data for comparisons. It is also important to point out that the NCAA is only one of several paths to the NHL, so this won’t include every player in the NHL data (in fact, more often than not, an NHL player won’t come from the NCAA).
1. Who Scores? Goals by Position
The center position scored the most goals during the entire 2024-25 season, with 3516 goals. The center position also had the most players, with 252. The classification of left and right wing is perhaps a bit unnecessary, however. Wing players typically play on both the left and right side, so if you combine wingers into one category, they narrowly beat out the center position: 3600 goals scored by 256 players. As expected, defensemen are last, with 1208 goals.
2. Which Positions Are Efficient? Actual vs Expected Goals
Defensemen are the only position group to meet or outscore their expected goals, converting at 4.7% above their xG. Forwards, despite generating higher volumes of shots, all underperform their expected goals, with left wingers underperforming the most at -6.6%. This suggests that while forwards take shots from higher-quality areas, they may be finishing below expectation, while defensemen are beating the model by converting lower-probability shots at a higher rate. It is also interesting that wingers on the left side fare quite a bit worse than on the right side. Averaged out, the wing position collectively under performs by 3.75%, similar to the center position.
3. How Do They Score? Shot Types in Regular Season vs Playoffs
The percentage of goals by shot type for the regular season and playoffs are very similar. With the exception of snap shots and wrist shots, the percentage difference for each shot type is, at most, a 1% difference. During the playoffs, however, there is a 5% increase in snap shot goals and a coinciding 6% decrease in wrist shot goals. So, to answer the question, I’d say that the playoffs only cause a change in snap shot and wrist shot goals. I would have thought there would have been an increase in tip and/or deflection shot goals in the playoffs since there is often more of an effort to create traffic in front of the net. While there is technically a slight increase (1% for each), it is not significant. Snap and wrist shots being the most affected is likely because they are the most popular shot type, and thus, more volatile.
4. What Creates Goals? Last Event Analysis
By raw count, shots and faceoffs precede the most goals simply due to the frequency of these events. However, the goal rate chart tells a different story: delayed penalties (DELPEN) convert on the first shot 19% of the time. Now, this does not mean delayed penalties convert 19% of the time overall. Unlike the other events, delayed penalties extend for a period of time rather than just an instance, so multiple shots can take place during the event of a delayed penalty. This means that the goal rate on delayed penalties is actually a little higher than 19%. Shots and misses also rank highly (8-9%) in goal rate due to evidence of sustained offensive zone pressure.
5. Does College Efficiency Translate?
Shooting Percentage by Shot Volume
Next, I wanted to investigate what volume of shots produces the best shooting percentage. If a player takes only a few shots, they could get lucky and have a higher than expected shooting percentage due to the small sample size. Vice versa, a player could score a lot of goals, but have a underwhelming shooting percentage due to the high volume of shots they take. Thus, I was curious what the relationship between the amount of shots a player takes and their shooting percentage.
For the NCAA, the boxplot below displays 25-shot intervals that begins to plateau around the mid-100s shots. Unsurprisingly, the shooting percentage is the highest for the smallest shot quantity bucket, but the optimal number of shots seems to be around 75-125. Before moving on to the NHL level, it’s important to point out that the NCAA regular season is only 34 games, compared to the NHL’s 82 games. Thus, the shot volume for NHL players is much higher on average.
NHL shooting percentages actually increase by shot interval, peaking at the 200-225 shot bucket. This is because the players who take the most shots are regarded as perennial All-Star and sometimes MVP caliber players. For instance the 3 players with the most shots during the 2024-25 season are David Pastrnak (a former Rocket Richard winner), Nathan MacKinnon (a former Rocket Richard and Hart trophy winner), and Zach Werenski (the heavy favorite for the 2025-26 Norris trophy).
Lastly, you’ll notice that the shooting percentages for NCAA players is higher than that of the NHL players. This is due to the quality of opposing players, particularly goaltending, the fact that this sample of NCAA players were the best point scorers during each season, and that 92% of these players are forwards (who had a 4.4% higher shooting percentage than defensemen). The NHL data, on the other hand, contains every NHL player. Ultimately though, the highest volume shooters in both the NCAA and NHL (200+ shots) have roughly the same shooting percentages.
Goals vs Shooting Percentage
These charts examine whether college scoring efficiency carries over to the NHL for players who made the transition, as these charts only look at NCAA players who also played in the NHL during the 2024-25 season. As we saw above, shooting percentages are higher in the NCAA than the NHL, but a lot of the players who were at the top end of goals and shooting percentage also carried those skills over into the NHL during the 2024-25 season. While the positive relationship between goals and shooting percentage is present at both levels, the NHL does shows a slightly tighter, more compressed distribution.
Conclusion
Across the analyis, a few consistent themes emerge about what drives goal scoring efficiency in the NHL.
Positionally, centers and wingers generate the most goals by volume, but every forward group underperforms their expected goals, with left wingers lagging the most at -6.6%. Defensemen, despite contributing far fewer goals overall, are the only group to outperform their xG at +4.7%. This suggests the xG model may be better calibrated for forwards, who shoot from more high-danger areas, than for defensemen, whose goals may come close to the blueline.
Shot type distributions are stable between the regular season and playoffs, with one notable exception: snap shots increase by 5% in the playoffs at the direct expense of wrist shots.
Sustained offensive zone pressure is the most reliable path to scoring. The last event analysis shows that shots and misses preceding a goal convert at 8-9%, while physical events like hits rank last. Delayed penalties stand alone as the single most dangerous situation in hockey, converting on the first shot at 19%, with the true rate a little higher when accounting for subsequent shots in the same sequence.
At the collegiate level, the best NCAA scorers do carry their efficiency into the NHL. However, the NHL distribution is more compressed, meaning the extremes seen in college tend to regress. High shooting percentages in the NCAA are partly a product of lower goaltending quality and a sample biased toward elite point scorers, so while college production is a useful signal, it is not a guarantee of NHL success.