Is there a correlation between home attendance and home performance?
Earlier this week we took a look at the Jets/Thrashers’ home and road goal differential to see how much room to improve the franchise had in both facets of the game. Well, as we found out, the Jets/Thrashers were the fifth worst team in the NHL in both home and road differential.
We have documented a number of facets of the game which the Jets have to improve this season; whether it be preventing shots, the penalty kill or fitting into a new coaching system there is much room to grow for this team.
One area we know the team will undoubtedly see an increase in this season is in overall attendance of the team’s home arena. Much has been made about Winnipeg’s popular white out. From personal experience I can say that being apart of a home Winnipeg Jets playoff game is the loudest stadium/arena I have ever been in. Period. It really has never come close (The Saddledome during the 2004 Finals was loud but not in the same conversation).
While few debate the passion and crowd noise of Winnipeg fans, the practical question moving forward is whether this passion and crowd noise can help contribute to the Jets’ success?
More on this after the jump.
How many times this summer have you heard, “This team will unquestionably be better because they played in Atlanta where crowds were sparse.” Or, “Man, these players will now be held accountable because everyone knows who they are and the fans of the city will push them to succeed.”
Let’s look at the numbers to see whether there is a correlation over the past three NHL seasons between teams that fill the building and success at home (calculated in terms of goal differential instead of record).
2008/09:
| Teams | Percentage Capacity | Home Goal Differential |
| Chicago | 111.2 | 38 |
| Ottawa | 105 | 12 |
| Minnesota | 102.8 | 27 |
| Toronto | 102.7 | -21 |
| Pittsburgh | 102.6 | 29 |
| NY Rangers | 102.3 | 15 |
| Vancouver | 101.1 | 32 |
| Philadelphia | 100.2 | 26 |
| Calgary | 100 | 38 |
| Edmonton | 100 | -3 |
| Montreal | 100 | 23 |
| San Jose | 100 | 48 |
| Buffalo | 99.2 | 12 |
| Detroit | 99 | 41 |
| Anaheim | 98.9 | 6 |
| Boston | 97 | 58 |
| Washington | 96.9 | 32 |
| Dallas | 95.4 | -1 |
| New Jersey | 89.6 | 37 |
| Los Angeles | 89.1 | 2 |
| Carolina | 88.5 | 9 |
| St. Louis | 88.4 | 14 |
| Nashville | 85.7 | 10 |
| Columbus | 85.7 | 2 |
| Colorado | 85.7 | -21 |
| Tampa Bay | 85.6 | -28 |
| Phoenix | 85 | -3 |
| NY Islanders | 84.5 | -15 |
| Florida | 81.2 | 13 |
| Winnipeg | 78.9 | -18 |
2009/10:
| Teams | Percentage Capacity | Home Goal Differential |
| Chicago | 108.3 | 36 |
| Toronto | 102.5 | -14 |
| Vancouver | 102.1 | 62 |
| Minnesota | 101.9 | 13 |
| Pittsburgh | 100.7 | 27 |
| San Jose | 100.4 | 44 |
| Philadelphia | 100.2 | 19 |
| Calgary | 100 | 0 |
| Edmonton | 100 | -15 |
| Montreal | 100 | 5 |
| Washington | 100 | 50 |
| NY Rangers | 99.3 | 13 |
| Buffalo | 99.1 | 30 |
| Boston | 99 | 2 |
| Ottawa | 98.9 | 18 |
| St. Louis | 98.6 | -7 |
| Detroit | 97.4 | 25 |
| Los Angeles | 93.6 | 16 |
| Dallas | 92.9 | 13 |
| Anaheim | 88.3 | 25 |
| New Jersey | 88.1 | 36 |
| Nashville | 87.5 | 3 |
| Columbus | 85 | 4 |
| Carolina | 81.4 | -4 |
| Florida | 78.7 | -7 |
| Tampa Bay | 78.4 | 5 |
| NY Islanders | 78.1 | 6 |
| Colorado | 77.5 | 20 |
| Winnipeg | 73.4 | -5 |
| Phoenix | 68.5 | 23 |
2010/11:
| Teams | Percentage Capacity | Home Goal Differential |
| Chicago | 108.7 | 20 |
| Toronto | 102.9 | -7 |
| Philadelphia | 101.1 | 26 |
| Pittsburgh | 100.9 | 22 |
| San Jose | 100.4 | 28 |
| Vancouver | 100.3 | 44 |
| Boston | 100 | 35 |
| Calgary | 100 | 20 |
| Edmonton | 100 | -30 |
| Montreal | 100 | 16 |
| St. Louis | 100 | 17 |
| Washington | 100 | 28 |
| Los Angeles | 99.8 | 10 |
| Minnesota | 99.7 | -11 |
| NY Rangers | 99.5 | 27 |
| Buffalo | 98.7 | 13 |
| Detroit | 98.1 | 2 |
| Nashville | 94.3 | 26 |
| Carolina | 87.6 | 12 |
| Tampa Bay | 87.4 | 27 |
| Anaheim | 85.8 | 17 |
| New Jersey | 83.8 | -8 |
| Colorado | 82.3 | -31 |
| Florida | 81.5 | -1 |
| Dallas | 81.3 | 18 |
| Columbus | 75.3 | -18 |
| Winnipeg | 72.6 | -13 |
| Phoenix | 71.2 | 8 |
| NY Islanders | 67.9 | 8 |
The numbers above demonstrate some interesting correlations. In the 2008/09 season, there was a 0.53 correlation between attendance (in terms of percentage capacity) and home success. In 2009/10, there was a 0.26 correlation. In 2010/11, there was a 0.33 correlation. So, the correlation over the past three NHL seasons between home capacity and home success was 0.37—not overly significant but not nothing either. There is somewhat of a positive correlation between the two variables.
Now, we should point out the “chicken or the egg” element of this article. Some will argue that attendance is only up to or over capacity because a team is successful and thus fans are heading to the arena to follow that already good team, thereby calling into question what is the cause and what is the effect. That may be a factor but finding that out is a far more difficult task.
All in all, it appears the Jets and the team’s season ticket holders for the next three to five years may very well help, at some level, the team’s success. Nice to know some of what you having been hearing this summer may actually be true.