You are ridiculous, Brian Boyle.

So, I’m watching 24/7 on Wednesday, reveling in all the hockey goodness and enjoying the crap out of it. And by the end, I come away with one overriding feeling:

Oh my God, the Rangers HAVE to be the most attractive team in the league.

But because we’re not just winging it here at Backhand Shelf — because we have integrity and we like to put numbers and facts behind our work — I knew I couldn’t just assume the Rangers were the most attractive team in the league.

I had to make up numbers to support my theory.

And even if that meant spending an entire day looking at pictures of hockey players (and indeed it was literally 12 hours of looking up nearly every active NHL player in Google Images), it’s a sacrifice I had to make. Because I’m a pro like that.

To do this, I had to create an objective system of rating Actual Foxiness (one step closer to creating the Relative Foxiness stat I’ve always wanted). Because I wanted it to be more of a team rating than actually rating specific players’ attractiveness, I went with a +/- system as follows:

  • If I pulled up your photos and went, “Wow, yes please,” you’re a +1.
  • If you’re just a regular looking dude, you’re even at 0. About 50% of these guys were on the fence in one direction or the other.
  • If I pulled up your picture and thought, “Oh. That’s a shame,” and you look wildly out of place with hot girls hanging off you, then sadly, you’re a -1.
  • If you’re exceptional in either direction, +2 or -2. Hey, Dan Girardi. *wink*

As it turns out, I was right. The Rangers are, in fact, the most attractive team in the NHL. Congrats boys!

Regardless of what happens tomorrow, you at least have that going for you (you know, in addition to living in the greatest city in the world, being rich, and getting to see Henrik Lundqvist naked every day).

Here’s the full ranking by team:

1. New York Rangers: +12

2. Carolina Hurricanes: +10 (wins tie by virtue of no negatives)

3. Chicago Blackhawks: +10

4. New Jersey Devils: +9

5. Tampa Bay Lightning: +8

6. St. Louis Blues: +7

7. Tie: Florida Panthers, Phoenix Coyotes, Detroit Red Wings, Colorado Avalanche: +6

11. Toronto Maple Leafs: +5

12. Tie: Winnipeg Jets, Philadelphia Flyers, Nashville Predators, Vancouver Canucks: +4

16. Tie: Washington Capitals, Minnesota Wild: +3

18. Tie: Pittsburgh Penguins, Columbus Blue Jackets, Ottawa Senators, New York Islanders: +2

22. Tie: San Jose Sharks, Los Angeles Kings, Boston Bruins: +1

25. Tie: Dallas Stars, Anaheim Ducks, Buffalo Sabres: 0

28. Calgary Flames: -1

29. Montreal Canadiens: -3

30. Edmonton Oilers: *ahem* -8 (DUDE!!!)

Sorry, Grease fans. I’m as shocked as you may or may not be. But with two -2 players (no, I’m not going to be mean and name names) and only two +1 players, that’s how the numbers shake out.

But congrats to Corey Potter on being The Good Looking One. And to Andy Sutton on being The One Good Looking Enough to Get the Pity +1 in my attempt to mitigate the damage.

If you’ve never sat down and Googled every NHLer in the league in a one day span, you’ve missed out on, well, very little honestly. But here are a few of my observations:

  • Most guys, when you enter their name, Google suggests searching for “girlfriend” or their team name or “injury”, but you know the results are going to be good when the first suggestion is “shirtless.”
  • Four guys showed up with pictures of them holding puppies. I was nearly helpless against this, except in the case of Barrett Jackman and Drew Stafford. Maybe try more puppies next time, guys? Or cuter puppies? Or have Taylor Pyatt stand in front of you while holding your puppy.

Is Gleason really a head-turner? Probably not. But with a puppy? YES.

  • Carolina was unusual in that 4 of their + points came from their 3 goalies, and the team as a whole had no negative players. If there was some sort of calculation that weighted hot goalies more than hot players and made a lack of negative players more favorable statistically, the Canes would have run away with this thing.
  • We’re all terrified of Maple Leaf Mike Brown‘s facial hair, right? In fact, lots of guys facial hair choices hurt their ratings, or at least threatened to.
  • In fact, hair in general is a problem with these guys. The Russians, in particular, need a +1 from their team to take them under their wing and get them proper haircuts.  My notes scream, “CUT YOUR HAIR!!!” at Sergei Kostitsyn.

Here are some more notes directly from my rating pages:

  • Johnson always looks freshly sexed. Big grin, sleepy blue eyes, tousled hair. Wow. Way to work it, AJ.

    Mike Cammalleri – One of the rare people who is less attractive when smiling. Stay serious, Cammo.

  • Roman Horak – My mom would hate him on sight but that’s what made him +1 sexy.
  • Ville Leino – Always making Chapstik face (like he’s just put Chapstik on and is smoothing it out on his lips)
  • Tuukka Rask = Angry Bird (yellow?)
  • Mark Letestu – My exact note was “looks like trouble :)” — So, there’s that.
  • In fact, I had lots to say about the Blue Jackets, like how Vinny Prospal looks like a drunk Australian in all his pictures and Aaron Johnson‘s face is instantly fall-in-love-with-able.  Who knew the Jackets were so interesting?

So there ya go. Possibly the most shallow, worthless statistical analysis you’ll ever see.

But given how much time the subjects of 24/7 spend with a camera right up in their grill, faces framed in moody lighting, I hope the NHL will use the list as a guide when picking teams for the next Winter Classic.

However, if you do end up playing the Oilers or the Habs next year, I have one word for you, NHL: Puppies. And lots of them.