Response Goals: What They Tell and What They Don't

When the Kraken return to the ice Monday in Colorado, the team returns from a week-long stretch with no games due to NHL rescheduling. Dave Hakstol's goal has been to use that time to address areas in his team's game that needed attention, including one that's been a hot button of late: response goals.

"Early in the season, one of the issues is we had trouble scoring," Hakstol said to our editor-in-chief, Bob Condor. "For a little while, that was in the spotlight. Then we started scoring, having some success, but then we went through a stretch during which we were giving too many outnumbered-man rushes ... now the most recent spotlight issue is response goals."

So, what is a response goal and what does it truly say about a team? Well, therein lies the need for a little more discussion.

Let's dig in.

There is no formal stat called "response goals." The idea of it though, can be traced to a few places.

Kraken play-by-play broadcaster John Forslund has used the term "answer goals" for years to refer to any two goals that occur within one minute (game clock time) of another. I personally first heard the term from Todd Richards in 2015.

Richards' definition referred to goals scored within two minutes of one another, and John Tortorella used that same delineation and to him, "response goals" were a proxy for momentum in a game.

Regardless of the time definition you choose, an important point: A response goal is made up of any two goals within a specific time frame, meaning there are four types of response goals:

None of this feels like it matters, though, when the Kraken are working to find their way back into the win column after five losses - the last three of which included four response goals that decided the final outcome (1 OPP-OWN; 3 OWN-OPP).

And it's valid to acknowledge that trend. After all, response goals describe what's going on during play and they tie directly to the final results. But we haven't (yet) put this stat through any mathematical rigor to see if it truly is predictive or just descriptive of what happens in a game.

Let's take a cursory look at this concept of response goals of every type, examining across the league to see if the trend Seattle is working through right now is part of a bigger NHL tendency.

First up, because it's front of mind, let's look at OWN - OPP response goals. Here's how each team stacks up in terms of how many such goals allowed this season and the win percentage in those games (teams sorted by number of "response goals").

"We have to bear down, play smart hockey and not give up big chances against or take late penalties or whatever it is," Chris Driedger said Dec. 30. "We're finding ways to give games away and that's something that has got to stop."

It is true that OWN - OPP response goals happen to Seattle quite a bit, but it is also interesting to note that some teams that allow a lot (Edmonton, St. Louis) still come out on the winning side of things. Some teams (Vegas, Anaheim) seem to not be affected even if a response goal against happens.

But what about the reverse scenario? If you get scored against a lot quickly do you ever do it to your opponents? Does it affect how much you win or lose?

Well, that's interesting. Seattle is one of the better teams in the league in finding a way to respond to opponents' goals within two minutes of time. While Seattle experienced a response goal against 10 times this season, they've done it to opponents nine times total.

"(Response goals against) have been an issue for us," Adam Larsson said Jan. 1. "We have talked about it. We should expect the push. It's frustrating but at the same time we have had some answers to those goals, too, so it goes both ways."

hey appear to be resilient and respond to goals against, it hasn't always translated to the win column. We could (and should) look into what the score was when these goals happened plus other factors.

Across the league, while most of the top teams in terms of total instances of OPP - OWN response goals come out on the winning end, the team that does it the most, New Jersey, doesn't by a long shot. Anaheim seems to be bit by response goals going this way as well.

Ok, so what about when an opponent scores two quick strikes? What happens then?

This looks more like our gut tells us it should, right? Few teams find a way to come out on the winning end of a game when your opponent scores twice quickly. Even those that do aren't doing it a ton of the time (St. Louis has the highest win percentage and that's with one of the lowest occurrence totals).

While Seattle hasn't had this happen a lot relative to the league, they are one of eight teams yet to find a win in a game with an OPP - OPP response goal.

The final type of response goal? When your own team scores twice within two minutes. Here's how all 32 teams stack up.

Again, this feels like we expect it should, no? Teams that score quickly and do it often probably tend to win games. Seattle has been able to do this six times but hasn't found results to the same degree as some other teams. It bears noting that three of the top six teams in OWN-OWN response goals come from the Kraken's own division.

So, what does it all mean?

There's no question that goals that happen quickly back-to-back stand out and feel like they can be a big driver of momentum for or against. There's also no question for Seattle, which has had a response goal of one kind or another in 29 of its 33 games, the pair of goals can feel like (or be!) game-deciding moments. But we don't yet fully know what response goals tell us about what's working, what's not, and what needs to change.

Many questions can still be asked about these response goals - what was the score? When did a response goal happen in a game? Who was on the ice?

What we do know, however, is the Kraken coaches and players are all aware of the response goals that hurt them and are working to correct course.

"Is there something to [response goals]? Absolutely," Hakstol said. "The reasons for [each] are very different. My job is to recognize the issue and address each individual reason that led to it.

"Those are things we have to address. You can call them whatever you want, response shifts, I call them bump-up shifts, those are huge - too many have gone against [us] negatively."