Most NHL teams have a 10-20% chance to win the game when trailing after 2 periods. I wonder what percentage of these third period comebacks overcame more than a one goal deficit?
How many did the Flames win coming back 2 or more in the third? Or any team?
You look at the top teams winning percentage when leading after two periods.
http://www.nhl.com/stats/team?report...tgAfterTrail2p
Winnipeg as an example is 39 wins, 1 loss, and 1 OT loss.
If you are down by 2 with 10 minutes left in the third against the Jets you are essentially doomed regardless of what you do.
Pulling the goalie gives you a better chance to create offence. I mean you probably give up a goal the vast majority of the time with ten minutes of empty net, but if you come back to win like 3% more often its probably worth it from a statistical standpoint.
I guess the big downside is that when you give up a goal with an empty net it really takes all of the tension out of the game. Even if you are down by two, fans believe there is still a shot at a comeback.
An empty net goal against splashes cold water in their faces.
So I guess there is the question of whether making comebacks slightly more likely makes up for essentially ruining all the remaining entertainment value for a much larger percentage of games.
Having the goalie pulled with a minute left can make for some extremely exciting hockey. The race against the clock really adds to the excitement. Many times the defending team comes up with the puck and scores with like 20 seconds left. Alright games over anyway. Who cares?
Who though wants to sit and watch 4 minutes of garbage time hockey after a coach pulls his goalie at 5 minutes and is promptly scored on. Nobody.
Even a big offensive push at one goal down isn't going to put you on the edge of your seat because the attacking team still has 4-5 more minutes of potential opportunities.
Even if it's a slightly better winning tactic, it doesn't have anywhere near the same amount of fun/adrenaline factor IMO.