How Rick Tocchet’s teams performed on the penalty kill in Year 2

We\'ve looked at how teams Rick Tocchet have coached in his first two seasons with them have fared on the offensive side of things . We\'ve also paid attention to how those same teams fared when it came to the man advantage . Now, we\'re turning to the other side of the special teams component: the penalty kill. Tocchet\'s defensive structure now should put the Flyers on the good side of penalty killing, reducing chances and decreasing the amount of goals against down a man (or two). At least that\'s the goal starting every season.

But it hasn\'t always been the case, as his time in Tampa Bay, Arizona, Vancouver, and now Philadelphia have all come with different rosters. And all with different talents. As noted in similar recent articles, the first season for Tocchet in Tampa Bay will be 2008-09, as he was behind the bench for all but 16 of the Lightning contests. And, for Vancouver, we use the 2023-24 season as he was coaching Vancouver for just 36 games following Bruce Boudreau\'s firing. Finally, all statistics are based on a four-on-five penalty killing situation as that\'s the predominant situation most of the season.

Tampa Bay: The first two seasons on the penalty kill

As potent as Tampa Bay\'s power play looked with the bevy of talent in Martin St. Louis, Vincent Lecavalier, and Steven Stamkos, the penalty kill had its share of problems when Tocchet\'s first full season began in 2008-09. And you know a penalty kill isn\'t good when the number of games they allowed two or more power play goals outnumbers the amount of games they didn\'t allow any power play goals by the opposition. That\'s never a good sign. They also allowed a power play goal in the last nine games to end the year. As well, the team wasn\'t exactly the most disciplined team, with over 400 power play opportunities against, well above the league average for 2008-09. They didn\'t score much on the penalty kill with just four short-handed goals for: two by St. Louis, one by Lecavalier, and one by Jeff Halpern.

Season PK Goals against PK Goals against NHL Avg. Times on PK Times on PK NHL Avg. PK % PK % NHL Avg. PK goals for PK goals for NHL Avg. Games PK had 0 goals against Games PK had 2+ goals against 2008-09 89 65 405 341 78.02 81.05 4 8 23 25 2009-10 67 56 334 304 80.06 81.77 2 6 35 15

In Tocchet\'s second year with the Lightning, they improved in a few basic areas, including decreasing the amount of goals allowed down a man, but perhaps more importantly, decreased the amount of times they ended up in the box by 61. Tampa was down a man for 593:34 minutes in Tocchet\'s first year. In year two, that dropped down to 520:49. Still not ideal, but it was a small step in the right direction. They only scored two shorties (Stamkos and St. Louis had one each), but they did a much better job of increasing the amount of clean sheets to use a soccer term, keeping the opposition\'s power play off the scoreboard in 35 of 82 games. On the other hand, when they were bad, they weren\'t as bad as much. Tampa only allowed two or more power play goals just 15 times in 2009-10, down from 25 in 2008-09. They moderately improved in terms of penalty kill league ranking, going from 26th in 2008-09 to 22nd the following year.

As far as the other analytics, Tampa Bay wasn\'t all that great in the first year. Nor in the second year. Only in 2008-09 did Tampa Bay crack the top 10 ranking in one statistic: expected goals against per 60 (5.68). Other than that, the team was in the mushy middle regarding effectiveness. Or, in other cases like the goals against per 60 in year one under Tocchet (7.28) they were just bad. There was improvement in some numbers, but not really enough to move the needle a lot. The biggest accomplishment Tampa Bay managed in the first two years was an emphasis on not ending up in the penalty box nearly as much. The table below will shed some more light. (Note: the league ranking is in brackets.)

Season Corsi against/60 Fenwick against/60 Shots against/60 Goals against/60 Expected goals against/60 High danger chances against/60 2008-09 95.52 (17th) 71.26 (15th) 51.75 (16th) 7.28 (25th) 5.68 (9th) 20.22 (16th) 2009-10 93.55 (15th) 69.81 (14th) 52.88 (21st) 7.26 (26th) 6.28 (19th) 22.23 (23rd)

Arizona: The first two seasons on the penalty kill

In his first year coaching the Coyotes, Tocchet\'s team didn\'t really do much either way in terms of being a great penalty-killing threat. Granted, it was almost night and day compared to his first year with Tampa, but generally Arizona was hit or miss when it came to consistently killing the opposition\'s power play. The 18th-ranked penalty kill gave up just under the league average, and were just under the league norm in efficiency.

What might stand out most of all is that the discipline Tocchet continued to stress with Philadelphia in the regular season and playoffs began to take hold with the Coyotes as well. Arizona conceded only 224 power play opportunities compared to the 334 the Lightning ahead in Tocchet\'s second year. The message was simple: stay out of the box, and see where the chips may fall. The first year only saw a pair of short-handed goals by Derek Stepan as the special team\'s only offense. They also were notably better in terms of games not giving up any power play goals as they hit that target just over half the season (43). The nights where the power play cost them more than once was also limited, with just six games seeing Arizona give up two or more goals.

Season PK Goals against PK Goals against NHL avg. Times on PK Times on PK NHL avg. PK % PK % NHL Avg. PK Goals for PK Goals for NHL avg. Games PK had 0 goals against Games PK had 2+ goals against 2017-18 46 50 224 250 79.46 79.82 2 7 43 6 2018-19 34 47 226 239 84.96 80.22 16 8 55 5

Arizona\'s second year under Tocchet had a lot of the same numbers, but the team truly was a force on the penalty kill. They gave up just 34 goals all season short-handed, while scoring a ridiculous 16 goals for down a man, including Michael Grabner who had six by himself while Stepan and Brad Richardson had three each. The amount of time short-handed increased a chunk (346:32 in 2017-18 to 376:51 in 2018-19), but other than that, the team was incredibly stingy giving up a goal down a man. The efficiency was notably higher, a five-and-a-half per cent increase over year one, going from eighteenth overall in year one under Tocchet to third.

The analytics also show how much of an improvement Arizona made in 2018-19. In year one most of the stats saw them in the bottom half of Corsi against per 60 and expected goals against per 60. And basically in the bottom-third of a lot of other related categories. In 2018-19, the Corsi against was not great. But outside of that Arizona was fantastic, topping the league in terms of goals against per 60, and being in the top 10 in Fenwick against per 60, shots against per 60, and expected goals against per 60.

Season Corsi against/60 Fenwick against/60 Shots against/60 Goals against/60 Expected goals against/60 High danger chances against/60 2017-18 101.29 (18th) 78.26 (22nd) 54.89 (19th) 7.45 (22nd) 7.30 (23rd) 23.72 (22nd) 2018-19 92.82 (18th) 66.71 (7th) 46.65 (7th) 4.78 (1st) 5.91 (6th) 18.63 (11th)

Whatever Tocchet changed from year one to year two with Arizona, it seemed to have worked wonders.

Vancouver: The first two seasons on the penalty kill

Like his previous first-year test runs with new clubs, Tocchet didn\'t really do a lot of major tinkering with the penalty kill. And the Canucks didn\'t exactly tear things up on the penalty kill. In 2023-24, Vancouver ranked eighteenth in terms of efficiency, with a 79.13 percentage. It was just above the league average, but nothing to write home about. They gave up 53 goals in just over 250 power play opportunities against. The Canucks also scored seven goals down a man, which was the league norm for that year. J.T. Miller, Tyler Myers, and Teddy Blueger each had a part of shorties, with Sam Lafferty adding one. The team conceded two or more power play goals just 13 times during the year, while having 45 games where no power play goal was allowed. Again, Vancouver found themselves in the middle of most penalty killing stats.

Season PK Goals against PK Goals against NHL avg. Times on PK Times on PK NHL avg. PK % PK % NHL avg. PK Goals for PK Goals for NHL avg. Games PK had 0 goals against Games PK had 2+ goals against 2023-24 53 52 254 247 79.13 79.02 7 7 45 13 2024-25 39 48 224 222 82.59 78.36 4 7 50 6

As you can see, whatever trials and turmoil the Canucks had between Miller and Elias Pettersson throughout most of 2024-25, they did not deter the penalty kill. The team was fantastic most of the season down a man, allowing a paltry 39 goals while also reducing the amount of times they were down a man. The efficiency went up just over three per cent over year one, and put Vancouver with the third best penalty-killing unit at season\'s end. The time on ice short-handed also declined, from 405:25 in 2023-25 to 378:40 in 2024-25. While only scoring four short-handed goals, the Canucks put up a stellar 50 games not allowing a power play goals. Only six games did they allow two or more power play goals. In short, the penalty kill was not a hinderance but a huge bonus for Tocchet\'s team. And seemed to mirror the job he did in Arizona, taking a middle-of-the-road special team and making it shine the following year.

What is evident not just in the basic statistics is how well Vancouver was in several underlying metrics, ranking in the top half of all but one category over the two seasons. The goals against per 60 was down nearly a full goal, and put the Canucks second in the league in that stat in 2024-25. Meanwhile, Corsi against per 60 and shots against per 60 were also in the top 10. It\'s remarkable how well Vancouver fared in this special team considering the outside noise (and inside noise) which surrounded the team most of the 2024-25 season, resulting in Tocchet vacating the position, J.T. Miller heading to the Rangers, and the Canucks going from a strong team to one essentially rudderless. But Tocchet managed to take the struggling or mediocre penalty kill in year one, and turn it into a plus in year two.

Season Corsi against/60 Fenwick against/60 Shots against/60 Goals against/60 Expected goals against/60 High danger chances against/60 2023-24 98.12 (12th) 71.63 (12th) 53.13 (15th) 6.51 (9th) 7.36 (11th) 22.05 (10th) 2024-25 93.33 (10th) 70.35 (12th) 47.69 (10th) 5.55 (2nd) 7.70 (14th) 23.93 (18th)

Philadelphia: The first season on the penalty kill

The Flyers started off great on the penalty kill, allowing just four in the month in October and 11 through November. Of course, it\'s no great surprise that the minute Dan Vladar went down to injury in January that the team\'s penalty-killing fell off a cliff. The team allowed seven in a three game span in the midst of Vladar\'s incident and injury, while allowing a single power play goal in four of the next five outings. On Vladar\'s return, Philadelphia went seven consecutive games without allowing a power play goal. Overall, they allowed 55 power play goals all year, five more than the league average. They scored seven short-handed goals, with Owen Tippett leading the way with three. They had their moments when they looked strong, but when they were bad they were hideous. The Flyers managed to have the proverbial clean sheet on the penalty kill half the season. But at the end of the day, Philadelphia had the 22nd best penalty kill. and spent nearly 400 minutes in the box down a man (393:22). For a team to make the playoffs with a poor penalty kill, some streaks of undisciplined play which didn\'t help, and an even worse power play was incredible.

Season PK Goals against PK Goals against NHL avg. Times on PK Times on PK NHL avg. PK % PK % NHL avg. PK Goals for PK Goals for NHL avg. Games PK had 0 goals against Games PK had 2+ goals against 2025-26 55 50 245 236 77.55 78.89 7 6 41 10

A look at the analytics for the Flyers shows that what Tocchet preached about the back door goals allowed, and dangerous chances in front, were kept to a minimum. Philadelphia was sixth in high danger chances against per 60 and ninth in expected goals against per 60. The Achilles heel for the team was the goals against per 60, a sad 8.08 which was 24th overall.

What can anyone glean from just one year under Tocchet regarding the penalty kill? Well, if history is any indication, it\'s that he can take a run-of-the-mill penalty killing team and turn them into an asset. It might be a huge ask for Tocchet and defensive coach Todd Rierden to get a handle on the penalty kill to turn it in the right direction this quickly, especially with a young team. But, generally, the numbers and rankings from year one are similar to what he found in his days with Tampa, Arizona, and Vancouver. He managed to turn Arizona and the Canucks around when it came to being down a man. There\'s no real reason to suggest he couldn\'t do the same thing in Philadelphia for 2026-27, especially for a team that bought into the defensive structure as much as they did down the stretch and into the playoffs.

In short, Tocchet might have his work cut out for him when it comes to being down a man. But he has the pedigree to get that special team heading in a much better direction. Time will tell if he can do it or not.

Stats courtesy of NHL.com, NaturalStatTrick.com, and Hockey-reference.com.

Talking Points