James Tanner: Antti Raanta Takes Us Half Way Home + Shark Tank and Tectonic

"And to think, there are actually people out there who think the Coyotes lost the trade that sent Tony Deangelo to the New York Rangers."


There is no question that the Yotes lost the trade. It's hindsight but this is another in a substantial list of bad moves made by Chayka.

Remember what you have said previously. You should pay elite players top dollar and everyone else 1M. Stepan is a decent player but he is overpaid. Raanta is now a backup. Both only have one year left on their current contracts so their time as Yotes might be short lived. Meanwhile DeAngelo is 24 and has blossomed into a top NHL offensive puck mover. The idea with a team in the Yotes position is to build a team with a long range plan. So that they can move towards contention with a wide window over a significant period of time. Not go for quick fixes and give up prime young talent to do so. Chayka should be on the hot seat.


"If Raanta was even 20% more durable, he's likely be the best goalie in the NHL and surely the best player in Coyotes history."

It certainly does take all kinds. If!

Every single GM (and knowledgeable fan) would take DeAngelo over Raanta in an instant. Mostly because people recognize the very disciplined, well-coached, defensive style in Arizona has helped their goaltenders produce excellent stats. Move Kuemper and Raanta to a tire-fire like Detroit, or a run-and-gun style like Florida or even Toronto and they would not look like superstars. As a Leafs fan you should be able to see this pretty easily. A guy like Freddie Anderson playing for a very solid defensive team like Arizona would put up way better numbers than he does now. Anderson is a better goalie than Raanta, hands down. But the stats don't say that. So you can't see it. I really hope Kuemper or Raanta move to another organization. Although after they regress to an average NHL starter, you'll say it's just luck. Because you don't know the sport too well.

Context matters. If the Coyotes were in a position to make a splash in the playoffs, and adding Stephan and Raanta is what pushed the needle, then it would be a win. Unfortunately, all they've done is languish in the bottom third of the league. Trade lost.

Every single GM (and knowledgeable fan) would take DeAngelo over Raanta in an instant. Mostly because people recognize the very disciplined, well-coached, defensive style in Arizona has helped their goaltenders produce excellent stats. Move Kuemper and Raanta to a tire-fire like Detroit, or a run-and-gun style like Florida or even Toronto and they would not look like superstars. As a Leafs fan you should be able to see this pretty easily. A guy like Freddie Anderson playing for a very solid defensive team like Arizona would put up way better numbers than he does now. Anderson is a better goalie than Raanta, hands down. But the stats don't say that. So you can't see it. I really hope Kuemper or Raanta move to another organization. Although after they regress to an average NHL starter, you'll say it's just luck. Because you don't know the sport too well.
- Kooleus

The Coyotes actually allow a lot of chances and do not have good defense, that's a myth. Another myth is that defense has anything to do with goalie performance. If it does at all, it's only very slight.

Look, I get that if I said something was yellow, you guys would say it's black, but you're really bending over backwards here with the bad takes.

I’m guessing your nowhere near a Coyotes locker room. Reason being, your kinda calling out a grown mans toughness. I would hope someone would film you getting your head stuffed up your own ass if you dared to walk in that room. Because that’s what would happen. Guaranteed 😵😭😵🤤😵😴

The Coyotes actually allow a lot of chances and do not have good defense, that's a myth. Another myth is that defense has anything to do with goalie performance. If it does at all, it's only very slight.

Look, I get that if I said something was yellow, you guys would say it's black, but you're really bending over backwards here with the bad takes.
- James_Tanner

Both statements here by you are incorrect. The Yotes are one of the top defensive teams in the league. Defense has a ton to do with goalie performance. The other poster is correct. Play both goalies on a lesser defensive teams and their number will suffer. Team defense and goaltending are symbiotic. They are reliant on each other.


They aren't bad takes. If you would learn the game better and stop using bad takes on stats, you might not get told it's yellow.

The Coyotes actually allow a lot of chances and do not have good defense, that's a myth. Another myth is that defense has anything to do with goalie performance. If it does at all, it's only very slight.

Look, I get that if I said something was yellow, you guys would say it's black, but you're really bending over backwards here with the bad takes.
- James_Tanner

This is where watching the games helps. Ask an actual goalie. You have one year to pad your personal stats. Do you want to spend that year playing for the 2019-20 Coyotes...or spend it in Detroit, Toronto, Florida. Watch the games.

The Coyotes actually allow a lot of chances and do not have good defense, that's a myth. Another myth is that defense has anything to do with goalie performance. If it does at all, it's only very slight.

Look, I get that if I said something was yellow, you guys would say it's black, but you're really bending over backwards here with the bad takes.
- James_Tanner

Another myth is that there is a connection between what you eat and the contents of your stomach.

The Coyotes actually allow a lot of chances and do not have good defense, that's a myth. Another myth is that defense has anything to do with goalie performance. If it does at all, it's only very slight.

Look, I get that if I said something was yellow, you guys would say it's black, but you're really bending over backwards here with the bad takes.
- James_Tanner

On what metric are you basing this claim?

On what metric are you basing this claim?
- Chunk

Thank you, Chunk. This is exactly the right question to ask. It makes no sense to discuss goalie performance until you have defined it. Is he using 5v5 Sv%, GSAA, GSAx, WAR or any other metric.

From my research, I think all of the above are heavily dependent on team defense. That's part of the statistical problem - you can't isolate goaltender performance.

I’m guessing your nowhere near a Coyotes locker room. Reason being, your kinda calling out a grown mans toughness. I would hope someone would film you getting your head stuffed up your own ass if you dared to walk in that room. Because that’s what would happen. Guaranteed 😵😭😵🤤😵😴
- Angus4444

What are you talking about?

Both statements here by you are incorrect. The Yotes are one of the top defensive teams in the league. Defense has a ton to do with goalie performance. The other poster is correct. Play both goalies on a lesser defensive teams and their number will suffer. Team defense and goaltending are symbiotic. They are reliant on each other.


They aren't bad takes. If you would learn the game better and stop using bad takes on stats, you might not get told it's yellow.
- MJL

2019-20 team Stats

Coyotes NHL Ranking by team percentages

Corsi: 24th
Femwick: 25th
Shots 19th
Goals 21st
scoring chances: 25th
dangerous scoring chances: 22nd

Now just straight rates

Shot attempts against per 60 : 26th
shots against per 60: 24th
expected goals against per 60: 21 st
scoring chances allowed per 60: 23rd
high danger chances allowed per 60: 19th

So by any way you look at it, they are one of the worst defensive teams in the NHL.

But what's this? Goals against per 60: 7th overall.

While I'm sure you have some kind of nonsensical reason for none of the evidence to actually matter, it does and you are wrong.

On what metric are you basing this claim?
- Chunk

On the fact that we can predict with near certainty which teams will be good defensively, but goalies are totally unpredictable.

On the fact that if you just measure team stats and match them up with goalie stats there is almost no correlation.

In hockey, the difference between a great goalie and a bad goalie is like three or four goals per hundred shots. Luck plays a larger role in goalie performance than team defense does.

Defense does help, but if you look around the league, the teams that actually have the reputations for being good defensively usually always have goalies on massive hot streaks, and more often than not, bad defensive stats.

The Leafs - after they fired Babcock - allowed roughly the same amount of dangerous chances per game as Dallas and St Louis, while allowing less than Arizona and the Islanders.

All four teams have a good defensive reputation which is entirely goalie based. The Leafs ended up 8th overall after their fired their coach, but they did it with good team defense and lousy goalie (ranked 26th).

The evidence that I am correct here is astounding, but it's a bit counter-intuitive to common hockey dogma, so a lot of people just dismiss it without looking into it.

On the fact that we can predict with near certainty which teams will be good defensively, but goalies are totally unpredictable.

On the fact that if you just measure team stats and match them up with goalie stats there is almost no correlation.

In hockey, the difference between a great goalie and a bad goalie is like three or four goals per hundred shots. Luck plays a larger role in goalie performance than team defense does.

Defense does help, but if you look around the league, the teams that actually have the reputations for being good defensively usually always have goalies on massive hot streaks, and more often than not, bad defensive stats.

The Leafs - after they fired Babcock - allowed roughly the same amount of dangerous chances per game as Dallas and St Louis, while allowing less than Arizona and the Islanders.

All four teams have a good defensive reputation which is entirely goalie based. The Leafs ended up 8th overall after their fired their coach, but they did it with good team defense and lousy goalie (ranked 26th).

The evidence that I am correct here is astounding, but it's a bit counter-intuitive to common hockey dogma, so a lot of people just dismiss it without looking into it.
- James_Tanner

So to clarify, what you're saying is that whether a team plays a wide open style with wingers "cheating" out of the zone looking for a scoring chance, or if all 5 fall back in front of the net to sacrifice their body to block any shot they can makes no difference in neither a) how a goalie plays his position, nor b) what his stats might be?
Having been a goalie for 17 years, I can assure you it makes a tremendous difference. I should think you might find a similar opinion from other goaltenders.
So, maybe statisticians simply have yet to devise the right equation to encompass this factor.
Either way, your dismissal of style of TEAM play on the single most important MEMBER OF THE TEAM might be unwise.

On the fact that we can predict with near certainty which teams will be good defensively, but goalies are totally unpredictable.

On the fact that if you just measure team stats and match them up with goalie stats there is almost no correlation.

In hockey, the difference between a great goalie and a bad goalie is like three or four goals per hundred shots. Luck plays a larger role in goalie performance than team defense does.

Defense does help, but if you look around the league, the teams that actually have the reputations for being good defensively usually always have goalies on massive hot streaks, and more often than not, bad defensive stats.

The Leafs - after they fired Babcock - allowed roughly the same amount of dangerous chances per game as Dallas and St Louis, while allowing less than Arizona and the Islanders.

All four teams have a good defensive reputation which is entirely goalie based. The Leafs ended up 8th overall after their fired their coach, but they did it with good team defense and lousy goalie (ranked 26th).

The evidence that I am correct here is astounding, but it's a bit counter-intuitive to common hockey dogma, so a lot of people just dismiss it without looking into it.
- James_Tanner

By what means can/do we predict which teams will be good defensively.

Can you please provide the evidence of the second bolded statement? The problem I have (and it may simply be your wording) is that you say that teams that have a "reputation" for being good defensively are largely that way because of the goalie.

I don't personally care what the reputation is. If the numbers and the video evidence (do they maintain a good gap, is there forward support/backchecking in the D-zone, how fast they identify incoming threats and rotate/adjust to it) bear it out, then said team is good at defense.

I'm not even arguing or disagreeing with your point. I just want to know how you get there. You make a lot of demonstrative statements. All I ask is that you show your work (sorry, I'm a chemist. It's how I'm built).

2019-20 team Stats

Coyotes NHL Ranking by team percentages

Corsi: 24th
Femwick: 25th
Shots 19th
Goals 21st
scoring chances: 25th
dangerous scoring chances: 22nd

Now just straight rates

Shot attempts against per 60 : 26th
shots against per 60: 24th
expected goals against per 60: 21 st
scoring chances allowed per 60: 23rd
high danger chances allowed per 60: 19th

So by any way you look at it, they are one of the worst defensive teams in the NHL.

But what's this? Goals against per 60: 7th overall.

While I'm sure you have some kind of nonsensical reason for none of the evidence to actually matter, it does and you are wrong.
- James_Tanner

So here we are again at the point where I have to explain the game to you. Goals are what matter most in the game Mr. Tanner. That's what decides who wins and loses a hockey game. You've never quite gotten that simple fact and place other team stats above goals scored for and against. The simple indisputable fact is that the Yotes rank 3rd in the NHL in GA/GP and give up 2.61 goals per game. What's also an indisputable fact is that only two other teams give up less goals per game than the Yotes do. That makes them one of the best defensive teams in the league.

There's a clue in some of the stats you listed that may point to why some other numbers are not among the best in the league. See if you can figure it out.

I'm clearly not wrong and I'm also not surprised that you might find it non-nonsensical. I find it non-nonsensical that you ignored the single most important stat.

So to clarify, what you're saying is that whether a team plays a wide open style with wingers "cheating" out of the zone looking for a scoring chance, or if all 5 fall back in front of the net to sacrifice their body to block any shot they can makes no difference in neither a) how a goalie plays his position, nor b) what his stats might be?
Having been a goalie for 17 years, I can assure you it makes a tremendous difference. I should think you might find a similar opinion from other goaltenders.
So, maybe statisticians simply have yet to devise the right equation to encompass this factor.
Either way, your dismissal of style of TEAM play on the single most important MEMBER OF THE TEAM might be unwise.
- Tonybere

Your experiences don't really factor in here, because you weren't playing in the NHL. At other levels, the differences between players are pretty big, and it probably would make a difference.

However, at the NHL level, literally no team plays completely wide open. The difference in styles is pretty small, and the difference between players even smaller.

If an NHL team went into total defensive lockdown, collapsed to the net and did nothing but ice the puck, anything they are doing to prevent goal scoring is ruined by the fact that they don't have the puck enough.

It's why Tyson Barrie helps is team defensively better than Roman Polak, even though Polak is a much better defender.

The worst NHL playoff team is still going to beat the best team in 25 years three out of ten times. Probably closer to four.

IN this world of marginal gains, there just isn't that much difference in how any team plays.

Here are the top ten worst teams for allowing dangerous scoring chances from the first game of the year to the last game played so far:
1. Winnipeg Jets
2 Chicago Blackhawks
3 New York Rangers
4 Anaheim Ducks
5 New York Islanders
6 Toronto Maple Leafs
7 Ottawa Senators
8 San Jose Sharks
9 Florida Panthers
10 Arizona Coyotes

Notice that the player who should walk away with the Vezina and Hart Trophies plays for the worst defensive team in the NHL.

Notice that four Vezina candidates play for the bottom four teams.

Here's your ten best defensive teams by dangerous scoring chances allowed

1. Minnesota Wild
2 Boston Bruins
3 Columbus Blue Jackets
4 Tampa Bay Lightning
5 Pittsburgh Penguins
6 Colorado Avalanche
7 Dallas Stars
8 Calgary Flames
9 Philadelphia Flyers
10 Buffalo Sabres

Three of those teams have goalies who could fairly garner Vezina nominations this year.

Nothing here is meant to be definitive, but it's definitely enough for you to not dismiss the idea out of hand.

Partial to chapelles show myself. Snl is so hit and miss but the quantity plus the performers put it up there.

You know what show I appreciated more as an adult than a kid? The adventures of Pete and Pete.

Your experiences don't really factor in here, because you weren't playing in the NHL. At other levels, the differences between players are pretty big, and it probably would make a difference.

However, at the NHL level, literally no team plays completely wide open. The difference in styles is pretty small, and the difference between players even smaller.

If an NHL team went into total defensive lockdown, collapsed to the net and did nothing but ice the puck, anything they are doing to prevent goal scoring is ruined by the fact that they don't have the puck enough.

It's why Tyson Barrie helps is team defensively better than Roman Polak, even though Polak is a much better defender.

The worst NHL playoff team is still going to beat the best team in 25 years three out of ten times. Probably closer to four.

IN this world of marginal gains, there just isn't that much difference in how any team plays.

Here are the top ten worst teams for allowing dangerous scoring chances from the first game of the year to the last game played so far:
1. Winnipeg Jets
2 Chicago Blackhawks
3 New York Rangers
4 Anaheim Ducks
5 New York Islanders
6 Toronto Maple Leafs
7 Ottawa Senators
8 San Jose Sharks
9 Florida Panthers
10 Arizona Coyotes

Notice that the player who should walk away with the Vezina and Hart Trophies plays for the worst defensive team in the NHL.

Notice that four Vezina candidates play for the bottom four teams.

Here's your ten best defensive teams by dangerous scoring chances allowed

1. Minnesota Wild
2 Boston Bruins
3 Columbus Blue Jackets
4 Tampa Bay Lightning
5 Pittsburgh Penguins
6 Colorado Avalanche
7 Dallas Stars
8 Calgary Flames
9 Philadelphia Flyers
10 Buffalo Sabres

Three of those teams have goalies who could fairly garner Vezina nominations this year.

Nothing here is meant to be definitive, but it's definitely enough for you to not dismiss the idea out of hand.
- James_Tanner

How many offensive, cheating towards offence D do the Jets have you think? Compared to the Leafs and ( this year especially ) their pinching ( mostly AHL ) D?

Your experiences don't really factor in here, because you weren't playing in the NHL. At other levels, the differences between players are pretty big, and it probably would make a difference.

However, at the NHL level, literally no team plays completely wide open. The difference in styles is pretty small, and the difference between players even smaller.

If an NHL team went into total defensive lockdown, collapsed to the net and did nothing but ice the puck, anything they are doing to prevent goal scoring is ruined by the fact that they don't have the puck enough.

It's why Tyson Barrie helps is team defensively better than Roman Polak, even though Polak is a much better defender.

The worst NHL playoff team is still going to beat the best team in 25 years three out of ten times. Probably closer to four.

IN this world of marginal gains, there just isn't that much difference in how any team plays.

Here are the top ten worst teams for allowing dangerous scoring chances from the first game of the year to the last game played so far:
1. Winnipeg Jets
2 Chicago Blackhawks
3 New York Rangers
4 Anaheim Ducks
5 New York Islanders
6 Toronto Maple Leafs
7 Ottawa Senators
8 San Jose Sharks
9 Florida Panthers
10 Arizona Coyotes

Notice that the player who should walk away with the Vezina and Hart Trophies plays for the worst defensive team in the NHL.

Notice that four Vezina candidates play for the bottom four teams.

Here's your ten best defensive teams by dangerous scoring chances allowed

1. Minnesota Wild
2 Boston Bruins
3 Columbus Blue Jackets
4 Tampa Bay Lightning
5 Pittsburgh Penguins
6 Colorado Avalanche
7 Dallas Stars
8 Calgary Flames
9 Philadelphia Flyers
10 Buffalo Sabres

Three of those teams have goalies who could fairly garner Vezina nominations this year.

Nothing here is meant to be definitive, but it's definitely enough for you to not dismiss the idea out of hand.
- James_Tanner

Here's a stat based argument that most can agree with or at least consider.

Good job on this one👍

And no insults...yowza!

Its pretty funny to see how heavily people rely on Corsi and Fenwick, especially after NHL teams don't find them useful or predictive. These stats fail to reflect the quality of the shot. Was it from the slot? Was the goalie screened? Was it an odd-man rush? Or was it a guy getting angled to the boards by a d-man, with backside pressure from a forward coming back, and he flips a weak wrister on net?

People have tried to improve upon this using scoring chances, but again, this is pretty subjective. Ovechkin ripping a shot from his wheelhouse with a guy crashing the far post has the same value as Ron Hainsey floating a shot into the breadbasket so he can get a whistle.

This is where it helps to WATCH the games.

Its also pretty funny that these are based on even-strength play. That's funny, because approximately 25% of the game is special teams. Seems like that could make a difference, right? In the last 3 seasons (well 2 seasons + 70 games)...Arizona has been shorthanded less often than every other team in the NHL, except Columbus. So they are consistently disciplined, which again speaks to being well-coached and well-structured. If I was a goalie, I'd sure love to play for a team that stays out of the penalty box. When Arizona is short-handed, which isn't that often, their PK is fantastic. In the last full-season, they tied for the best PK in the entire NHL, while also scoring the 2nd most short-handed goals to boot. Seems like Tocchet has quite a number of PK specialists to choose from, and has them blocking shots like crazy. Before this season was halted, Arizona's PK was 5th.

This is where it helps to WATCH the games.

Every time an Arizona goalie gets in the net he's playing behind a very well-coached, well-disciplined team. They keep shots to the outside. They clear the crease and let goalies see the puck. They don't take many penalties. And when they do, they are among the best at killing them off. The reason they don't win more is they don't score much themselves. Part of that is because of the lack of skill, and part is because of the obsession with playing a low event defensive game. If you actually WATCH the games you'll see a lot of 2-1 games, 3-2 in a shootout. Seems like the kind of place that would be pretty conducive for a goalie to put up good stats.

But people can believe whatever they want to believe in. I understand stats. I understand their value, but also their limitations. I also WATCH games. Thousands and thousands and thousands of them. That helps with my knowledge. Or listen to the guy who watches lots of movies and listens to music...

Here's a stat based argument that most can agree with or at least consider.

Good job on this one👍

And no insults...yowza!
- rrentz

I agree, rrentz. I still don't agree it is that simple, but this argument bolstered by facts has me considering where my thinking may be revised.

I agree, rrentz. I still don't agree it is that simple, but this argument bolstered by facts has me considering where my thinking may be revised.
- Tonybere

Isn't this how it should be done on all topics?

IDK why he can't stick to what he just did. There wouldn't be any bad words thrown back and forth if Tanner kept it civil and fact/stat based.

If someone doesn't agree, fine, make your own argument

Its pretty funny to see how heavily people rely on Corsi and Fenwick, especially after NHL teams don't find them useful or predictive. These stats fail to reflect the quality of the shot. Was it from the slot? Was the goalie screened? Was it an odd-man rush? Or was it a guy getting angled to the boards by a d-man, with backside pressure from a forward coming back, and he flips a weak wrister on net?

People have tried to improve upon this using scoring chances, but again, this is pretty subjective. Ovechkin ripping a shot from his wheelhouse with a guy crashing the far post has the same value as Ron Hainsey floating a shot into the breadbasket so he can get a whistle.

This is where it helps to WATCH the games.

Its also pretty funny that these are based on even-strength play. That's funny, because approximately 25% of the game is special teams. Seems like that could make a difference, right? In the last 3 seasons (well 2 seasons + 70 games)...Arizona has been shorthanded less often than every other team in the NHL, except Columbus. So they are consistently disciplined, which again speaks to being well-coached and well-structured. If I was a goalie, I'd sure love to play for a team that stays out of the penalty box. When Arizona is short-handed, which isn't that often, their PK is fantastic. In the last full-season, they tied for the best PK in the entire NHL, while also scoring the 2nd most short-handed goals to boot. Seems like Tocchet has quite a number of PK specialists to choose from, and has them blocking shots like crazy. Before this season was halted, Arizona's PK was 5th.

This is where it helps to WATCH the games.

Every time an Arizona goalie gets in the net he's playing behind a very well-coached, well-disciplined team. They keep shots to the outside. They clear the crease and let goalies see the puck. They don't take many penalties. And when they do, they are among the best at killing them off. The reason they don't win more is they don't score much themselves. Part of that is because of the lack of skill, and part is because of the obsession with playing a low event defensive game. If you actually WATCH the games you'll see a lot of 2-1 games, 3-2 in a shootout. Seems like the kind of place that would be pretty conducive for a goalie to put up good stats.

But people can believe whatever they want to believe in. I understand stats. I understand their value, but also their limitations. I also WATCH games. Thousands and thousands and thousands of them. That helps with my knowledge. Or listen to the guy who watches lots of movies and listens to music...
- Kooleus

The eye test is the best way to evaluate, all other forms, i.e. Fenwick and Corsi should be used as a supplemental tool. This isn't baseball or Biily Bean's sport. Hockey isn't like baseball where there are 50 individual at bats against multiple pitchers over the course of 162 games