Overtime Incentives in the National Hockey League (NHL)

Abstract

The National Hockey League (NHL) in 1999-2000 changed its rules for games that are tied at the end of regulation time. The old rules called for the team to be awarded two points for a win, one for a tie, and zero for a loss. The league felt that play was too conservative during overtime because teams feared losing the one point already earned. The new rules called for a team to retain its one point earned for tying in regulation even if it ultimately lost during the overtime. This change strengthens the importance of a subtle difference in incentives depending on whether one's opponent is from the same conference. Because playoff positions are determined only by intraconference rankings, losing in overtime to an out-of-conference opponent has no negative consequences. Alternatively, losing to an in-conference opponent could affect the ultimate playoff position of the team. The authors use multiple regression analysis of individual games during the 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 seasons to examine this subtle difference in incentives.