James Tanner: Coyotes Have the Team Stats of a Basement Team

You might want to proof this article. It's full of errors.

You might want to proof this article. It's full of errors.
- gregman98

On the weekends I like to work in the living room and blast the stereo rather than my office. That means I write with the lap top that can freeze and delete your work at anytime. So when I finish my piece, I just submit it to save, then go back and fix it up.

"It is an indisputable fact that teams that allow more shot-attempts, shots, scoring chances, dangerous chances and expected goals than they get are not good at defense."

This statement by you Tanner is 100% incorrect. It's almost laughable how much you don't understand the stats that you use on a regular basis. Yet you call others ignorant. What that shows you is that the Coyotes are a poor offensive team and they spend too much time defending! Despite that they're still a top 5 team in the NHL in GA per game! They are good at defense. Defense is keeping the puck out of the net!

Why do so many people feel the need to bash writers who are going out of their way to generate content (that everyone on this site eats up)? Read.. comment if you can add value.. try not to be jerk--

"Those are things that ignorant people say so that they can keep believing in what they already believe in. Hockey stats aren't complicated - if you get more shot-attempts, and scoring chances than the other team, you have a better chance of winning than losing."

It's 2020, this really shouldn't have to be said...

Why do so many people feel the need to bash writers who are going out of their way to generate content (that everyone on this site eats up)? Read.. comment if you can add value.. try not to be jerk--
- njmezzy

The comments are the only value to the discussion. It’s what happens when you throw up half-assed blogs full of cherry picked stats, sweeping statements and biased bullshít.

Why do so many people feel the need to bash writers who are going out of their way to generate content (that everyone on this site eats up)? Read.. comment if you can add value.. try not to be jerk--
- njmezzy

So you completely dismiss that the blogger called people ignorant? Is that not being a jerk?

"Those are things that ignorant people say so that they can keep believing in what they already believe in."

What a hypocrite.

So you completely dismiss that the blogger called people ignorant? Is that not being a jerk?
- MJL

No not really, that wasn't necessary either. Usually his comments are 90% people talking s... so he's probably a bit on edge when writing and feeling defensive.

Why do so many people feel the need to bash writers who are going out of their way to generate content (that everyone on this site eats up)? Read.. comment if you can add value.. try not to be jerk--
- njmezzy

I agree with you, but I’m old. I really don’t like Steve Simmons but I don’t waste my time posting negative comments about his work.

I could choose not to read.

No not really, that wasn't necessary either. Usually his comments are 90% people talking s... so he's probably a bit on edge when writing and feeling defensive.
- njmezzy

He brings it on himself just like he did with today's blog. Calling people ignorant while calling non facts indisputable as well as solidifying his misuse of analytics.

He brings it on himself just like he did with today's blog. Calling people ignorant while calling non facts indisputable as well as solidifying his misuse of analytics.
- MJL

I don’t think it makes any difference what he puts in his blogs because the same haters show up regardless.

No not really, that wasn't necessary either. Usually his comments are 90% people talking s... so he's probably a bit on edge when writing and feeling defensive.
- njmezzy

It's a vicious cycle.

He talks poop to his readers on a regular basis and says highly controversial things as indisputable facts, so people comment in a less than complimentary manner. And it's been going on for years.

I think half the people that read his stuff do so just to see what craziness he'll say next and to read up on the arguments between him and other posters (and sometimes join in themselves). Without the people arguing on his comment boards, there would barely be any traffic. The controversy keeps him in business lol.

Tanner, weren't you using statistics at the start of the year (and all the way up to the new year) to tell everyone what a good team this was?

A quick check in old blogs, it looks like you were pointing out a few flaws months ago, so good for you, I guess.

They are a basement team, they just overachieve lol

Why do so many people feel the need to bash writers who are going out of their way to generate content (that everyone on this site eats up)? Read.. comment if you can add value.. try not to be jerk--

-njmezzy

Seriously, some commenters come on here every single day just to call the writers stupid. If they're going to post here every day, and know so much better than the existing writers, then they should submit a blog and show how much smarter they really are.

Tanner, I don't always agree with you(although do more often than not) but I enjoy your posts.

I don’t think it makes any difference what he puts in his blogs because the same haters show up regardless.
- shack67

I think it makes a big difference. Don't insult people or call opinions indisputable facts and he wouldn't take much grief. Then again, maybe he wouldn't have as large of a following. Maybe that's the Shtick.

"It is an indisputable fact that teams that allow more shot-attempts, shots, scoring chances, dangerous chances and expected goals than they get are not good at defense."

This statement by you Tanner is 100% incorrect. It's almost laughable how much you don't understand the stats that you use on a regular basis. Yet you call others ignorant. What that shows you is that the Coyotes are a poor offensive team and they spend too much time defending! Despite that they're still a top 5 team in the NHL in GA per game! They are good at defense. Defense is keeping the puck out of the net!
- MJL

You are incorrect, sir. It's baffling that you think that a team that allows more high danger chances than it gets is good at defense. The Coyotes actually allow more dangerous shot-attempts per game than the Leafs do since they fired their coach.

There might be something to the idea of keeping shots to the outside and allowing more shot-attempts on purpose that are low-danger.

There might be, I don't think so, but it's possible.

But if you move beyond Corsi and look at teams that allow dangerous chances, that argument goes out the window.

If goalie performances were linked to defense, then it follows that it would be easier to predict future goalie performance than it is.

If team defense correlated to good goaltending, then Connor McDavid wouldn't be the best player in the world, that player would be a goalie.

The best goalie in the NHL every year provides more value than whoever the best skater is, but there's no way to predict from year to year which goalie that will be. Ergo, team defense and goalie performance are a weak link at best.

So you completely dismiss that the blogger called people ignorant? Is that not being a jerk?
- MJL

Calling someone ignorant shouldn't be an insult. If you disagree with facts, you are ignorant. That is a fact.

Tanner, weren't you using statistics at the start of the year (and all the way up to the new year) to tell everyone what a good team this was?

A quick check in old blogs, it looks like you were pointing out a few flaws months ago, so good for you, I guess.
- Thecakeisalie

I said this Coyotes team wasn't a playoff team unless they got 930 save percentage in September, and I haven't waivered.

Seriously, some commenters come on here every single day just to call the writers stupid. If they're going to post here every day, and know so much better than the existing writers, then they should submit a blog and show how much smarter they really are.

Tanner, I don't always agree with you(although do more often than not) but I enjoy your posts.
- DarthProbert

Hey thanks man!

Well Done Chayka!

81 Million worth of cap and you got a team that can't score and is going to miss the playoffs (AGAIN)

And the future doesn't look to be bright either

Boy Genius.....

You are incorrect, sir. It's baffling that you think that a team that allows more high danger chances than it gets is good at defense. The Coyotes actually allow more dangerous shot-attempts per game than the Leafs do since they fired their coach.


- James_Tanner

Defense is keeping the puck out of the net. The Coyotes are one of the best in the league at that. That is an indisputable fact. This should be a lesson to you on what an indisputable fact is. You fail to factor in the offense as part of that equation.

There might be something to the idea of keeping shots to the outside and allowing more shot-attempts on purpose that are low-danger.

There might be, I don't think so, but it's possible.

But if you move beyond Corsi and look at teams that allow dangerous chances, that argument goes out the window.

If goalie performances were linked to defense, then it follows that it would be easier to predict future goalie performance than it is.

If team defense correlated to good goaltending, then Connor McDavid wouldn't be the best player in the world, that player would be a goalie.

The best goalie in the NHL every year provides more value than whoever the best skater is, but there's no way to predict from year to year which goalie that will be. Ergo, team defense and goalie performance are a weak link at best.
- James_Tanner

Goalie performance is absolutely linked to defense. The two are symbiotic. I agree that the goaltender is the most important player on the ice. What you fail to realize is that the goaltender is a part of the team and part of the defense for a team. You seem to want to separate the two.

No matter how many stats you want to use, the most important is goals. Goals scored and keeping the puck out of your net.

I'm going to teach you something here. The best way to defend is to not defend. Attack the other team instead. No matter how good a team is at defending, if you're defending more than attacking, chances are you'll be losing. If the Coyotes were a better offensive attack team, all of those stats you mentioned would look different.

You failed to open your mind and actually do some real analysis here. Par for the course.

Calling someone ignorant shouldn't be an insult. If you disagree with facts, you are ignorant. That is a fact.
- James_Tanner

The fly in the ointment here is how often you're wrong in calling something a fact that isn't. You still can't tell the difference between an opinion and a fact. That's ignorance.