James Tanner: Coyotes Yet to Score - But Have Played Two Good Games

He should probably learn to pull the goalie with a 5x3 and a chance to make it 6x3.... down by a goal. What horrible time and player management.

"If you play like this, you win 95% of the time."

"People can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forty percent of all people know that." - Homer Simpson

The coach cost the Yotes a potential point. The second the Ducks were called for their second penalty late in the game, Raanta should have been pulled for a 6 on 3 advantage. Keeping him in goal instead for 30 seconds or so was stupid.

On the bright side, the Yotes are off until Wednesday. They'll play the Ducks again and I have no doubt they won't be held off the scoreboard 3 straight games. Ducks will probably be without Getzlaf, Perry, Kesler, Kase, Eaves, and Ritchie (like the 3rd period last night). That's only 6 of our top 9 injured. Throw in anyone who might get injured Monday too.

Your headline to this article says it all: Coyotes have failed to score but have played two good games. Geez!

The Coyotes opened the season on Thursday playing the Dallas Stars to 58 minutes of a 0-0 tie, only to allow three goals in ninety seconds in the second period to lose 3-0.

Kinda fuzzy math there

Wonder how Galchenyuk will impact the scoring issue? Goals against that is. That must be a serious groin injury

Kinda fuzzy math there
- jcragcrumple

Yeah, especially when you discount the fact that the Coyotes trailed 3-0 for more than half of the game. That's like saying the Bruins-Caps opener was a scoreless deadlock for 19:53 (if you count up all the seconds where no pucks actually entered the Boston net).

Yeah, especially when you discount the fact that the Coyotes trailed 3-0 for more than half of the game. That's like saying the Bruins-Caps opener was a scoreless deadlock for 19:53 (if you count up all the seconds where no pucks actually entered the Boston net).
- bmeltzer

Not like that at all. There was 90 seconds of good bounces for the stars. The coyotes dominated the rest of the game, including hitting 4 x goal posts.

Not like that at all. There was 90 seconds of good bounces for the stars. The coyotes dominated the rest of the game, including hitting 4 x goal posts.
- james_tanner1

what was the Stars hit goal post total.

"Coyotes finished last in the NHL but they had a good season" -James Tanner 2019

Kinda fuzzy math there
- jcragcrumple

Maybe in Tanners replay of the game he watched the first period, then the third and then the second period in that order , then the math works.

meltzed

If you play like this, you win 95% of the time.
- James Tanner

Actually, you probably lose 95% of the time, because no team is going to play like that for a full game unless it's behind on the scoreboard. If any of the early chances had gone in and the Yotes had gotten the tying goal and even a lead, they would've backed off and not needed to play like that until the final buzzer.

Not like that at all. There was 90 seconds of good bounces for the stars. The coyotes dominated the rest of the game, including hitting 4 x goal posts.
- James Tanner

It's a little ridiculous how you value shots that don't go in over shots that do. You always play up shots that your team takes as "domination" and downplay goals by the opposing teams as "good bounces." If the teams were reversed, would you acknowledge that the other team dominated yours and that it was only for a few lucky bounces that your team won? I doubt it. I imagine that you'd spin it as your team making the most of its scoring opportunities and playing great defense to hold your leads (and maintain the shutouts), while downplaying the other team's large number of shots as low quality and born of desperation.

what was the Stars hit goal post total.
- PinkSock

Zero, I'm pretty sure. But then again I am gonna notice Coyotes bad breaks a bit more.

Actually, you probably lose 95% of the time, because no team is going to play like that for a full game unless it's behind on the scoreboard. If any of the early chances had gone in and the Yotes had gotten the tying goal and even a lead, they would've backed off and not needed to play like that until the final buzzer.

It's a little ridiculous how you value shots that don't go in over shots that do. You always play up shots that your team takes as "domination" and downplay goals by the opposing teams as "good bounces." If the teams were reversed, would you acknowledge that the other team dominated yours and that it was only for a few lucky bounces that your team won? I doubt it. I imagine that you'd spin it as your team making the most of its scoring opportunities and playing great defense to hold your leads (and maintain the shutouts), while downplaying the other team's large number of shots as low quality and born of desperation.
- Osprey

Just not true . If the Coyotes play bad I'll say so.

The San Diego Gulls beat the Arizona Coyotes in a lucky win in which the Gulls were outplayed, but happened to score the only goal. To be fair, there were a few Anaheim Ducks on the ice too.

James Tanner: Coyotes Yet to Score - But Have Played Two Good Games
- James_Tanner

Nice to see your probationary period has ended, and EK finally promoted you to full time Yotes blogger from full time caps blogger and your blogs are finally posted in the correct section.

If the Coyotes dominated the game wouldn't that suggest that the coach utilized his players in successfully.

And the march to the bottom begins. What a joke of a franchise. Start with firing the GM and get a guy who knows what NHL talent looks like.

Why do the Coyotees exist?

Your articles on the Domi/Galchenyuk trade were hilarious. Domi made more defensive plays in two games then Chucky made in 5 years. If you run down Domi’s defensive game, I can’t wait til you get a look at chucky.

Only two games in but Domi has been unbelievable. Gritty, creating offense, solid defense. Wow.

Goes to show that boots on the ground beats analytics all day long. Did the computer boy toy even wear a pair of skates in his life? Haha

Goals win games. But I’m glad to see Tanner sticking to his guns. It’s even better when the team he blogs for is winning but he’s pissed bacusse it doesn’t fit his fancy stat crutch mentality.

The posters on this board legitimately have no idea what you’re talking about and it’s embarrassing. Take a simple stats tutorial on YouTube or something. Shots and possession are strongly correlated to goals and winning. That is why it’s important to pay attention to those stats night in and night out. Sometimes the under shooting team wins, because as statistical rules teach us, there are always outliers. But, over time, the high shot team will have more wins than the low shot team. It’s jot even close to debateable, and like most of the trolls on this board, it’s hilarious to watch people wiff on common sense so regularly.

Yeah, especially when you discount the fact that the Coyotes trailed 3-0 for more than half of the game. That's like saying the Bruins-Caps opener was a scoreless deadlock for 19:53 (if you count up all the seconds where no pucks actually entered the Boston net).
- bmeltzer

If you really don’t understand what he was saying, then I don’t know what to say. When you look at the whole game, the coyotes were the better team. There was a two minute stretch where the stars were and it resulted in a loss. Statistics prove that out. I am baffled that you are not able to understand that and actually wasted time trying to question it in this board.

I guess I assume most of the people on here are adults, but I should remember you may be a 12 year old still learning the basics of math.