This is an interesting site with lots of cool graphics, but here’s one that shows average number of years for a driver between collisions.
Those links show other unrelated stuff, but its Oregon.
Idaho seems like the best but that’s probably because it takes years before even see another driver on the road. 
Not getting in an accident or getting a ticket is not a definition of a good driver IMO.
I know dozens of people who are absolute disasters for anyone unlucky enough to be on the road at the same time as them. And they never have a ticket or wreck. But do they ever cause a bunch of wrecks & sometimes even cause others to get a ticket.
YMMV
If you want to meet the worst drivers this side of China, come down to Houston.
Wouldn’t this show up in the statistics? They’re counting the total number of wrecks and tickets, not the total caused by the driver whom it happens to.
Interesting. My wife swears Maryland drivers are terrible, and this appears to back that up scientifically.
Not surprised that PA is up there. When I was in Philly, I noticed that people in general were rude of course (after all, it’s on the East Coast), but the drivers seemed especially aggressive.
I’d bet this chart would correspond nicely with simply the number of urban miles driven per year. All the “worst” drivers are from places where very long commutes all within an urban area are common.
Another interesting consideration is that those green states in the northern Great Plains and Rocky region (ID and SD, but I assume MT, WY, and ND would be green too) have some of the highest per capita highway fatalities. People there don’t do a lot of the kinds of driving that gets them into fender-benders, but that doesn’t mean they’re all good drivers!
That’s interesting because I’ve always thought that long highway commutes had to be the worst for fatalities. I’ve always tried to avoid them but when I was consulting, I couldn’t always do that and would periodically get caught in traffic resulting from really hideous accidents - people commuting into work at no o’clock in the morning, in the dark with bad road conditions like rain, snow or fog and at unsafe speeds.
How the hell is Massachusetts not bright, neon purple?
CT, I believe, but not MA???
If it was about the worst state for wrecks / per whatever. that in no way is saying that the worst drivers are these. IMO
If that was so, then NASCAR drivers would be one of the worst group of drivers.
Does one fender bender = the same as one head on with 5-6 fatalities?
My point is / that # of wrecks does not automatically make a driver bad.
Many people have been in many wrecks where it was not even 1% their fault. So that also slants the results IMO.
YMMV
“Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. 15 times, it’s a shitty driver” - Auric Goldfinger
I’m amazed that California as a whole didn’t rank higher. I’d also be interested in stats at the city level.
You can try emailing the guy who writes the blog. He might actually have access to that sort of data. 
A guess based on recently spending a week in Springfield: Boston is offset by the rest of the state.
I can agree with this, in a “our politicians are the WORST” way :).
I once saw a guy holding up a fire truck behind him, sirens going the driver leaning on the horn, so the guy just starts slowing and then stopped and put his hand out the window. I swear someone in the Houston DMV had to be selling licenses.
Looks to me like, buy and large, the stats merely point out the states with the highest population densities. More vehicles in less space = more accidents. I’m not at all surprised.