Guest writer on progoaliecoach.com

So far, every article on this site has been written by me. I have shared my thoughts on goaltending and goalie coaching, and tried to give a fresh look at life as a professional goalie coach. This time is a little different.

I came across a column by Janne Tuunanen ("Tuunaustauko" on meksi.fi) that put into words many things I have had on my mind for a long time. It looks at goaltending through the situations a goalie faces and the environment he plays in, instead of just save percentage. It is insightful and it really made me think.

The original text is in Finnish, so I translated it into English to share it with you here and on LinkedIn. It is a longer read, but worth your time. Enjoy ✌️

Written by Janne Tuunanen. Originally published in Finnish as part of his "Tuunaustauko" column on meksi.fi. Published here in English translation with the author's permission.

Original column (in Finnish): https://www.meksi.fi/a/9869205

Tuunaustauko | Fresh examples from the NHL and Liiga reveal: we understand goaltending all wrong

The NHL season had barely gotten properly underway when the familiar debate was already in full swing: do the Edmonton Oilers have a goaltending problem? When goals go in and save percentages sink, all eyes quickly turn to the space between the posts. It would be far more useful, though, to understand what kinds of situations a goalie has to face and what kind of environment he plays in.

Save percentage and goals against average (GAA) are the most traditional and best known goaltending stats in hockey. They are also easy to read, and any hockey follower can grasp the logic behind them.

But what do they actually tell us? They tell us the outcome. The causes are often found somewhere else entirely, far from the crease.

In hockey, it is easy to judge a goalie by his save percentage. That is also where the flaw in the whole goaltending debate lies: save percentage counts shots, but a goalie decides situations. That is why the two do not always tell the same story.

The quality of a situation is largely determined by how the team defends, attacks and controls the game around him. On top of that, situations do not begin at the moment of the shot. They often start seconds, or even tens of seconds, earlier.

Not all shots in hockey are equal, even though save percentage values them exactly the same. A long shot with no screen is a completely different thing for a goalie than a one timer fired straight off a cross ice pass.

A scoring chance created at the end of a controlled attack differs from a situation that opens up after an offensive zone takeaway, and a breakaway cannot be compared with a shot from a tight angle that carries no back post threat. In the stats, though, all of these look the same: one shot.

"The goalie is often the last link in the chain of events, and also the most visible player in it."

What matters for the goalie is not only where the shot comes from, but how the whole situation unfolds. Did he have time to prepare? Could he see the puck the whole way? Did he have to move laterally before the shot? Was the defence positioned correctly, or did the opponent get to attack an unorganised five?

Things that happen at the moment of the shot also affect the difficulty of the save significantly. Was the goalie's line of sight clear, or did a screening player block the puck right as it was released? Did an attacker come in from the weak side at full speed to the back post, creating an extra threat? Did the goalie have to split his attention between several threats, or could he focus on the shot alone?

Often the difficulty of a save has less to do with where the shot comes from than with how much information the goalie has to process at the same time.

A shot or a scoring chance rarely comes out of nowhere. Behind it there may be a failed breakout, a turnover, a lost battle, an offensive zone takeaway or a loose puck from a blocked shot. When the opponent finally shoots, the stats record one shot and possibly one goal. Everything that happened before that stays outside the save percentage.

The goalie is often the last link in the chain of events, and also the most visible player in it. That is why the team's mistakes end up so easily in his stats, even when the root cause arose far from the net and well before the actual shot.

"Good defending does not only remove shots. It removes options."

Good defending does not only remove shots. It removes options.

Think of a two on one rush. In a well defended situation, the defenceman takes away the passing lane. In practice the attacker is left with one realistic solution, and the goalie can anticipate how the play will develop far better.

In a poorly defended situation, the attacker still has several options. He can shoot, pass or carry the puck closer to the net. The goalie has to prepare for all of them at once, which adds uncertainty and makes decision making harder.

The shot may in the end come from exactly the same spot as in the first example, but the complexity of the situation for the goalie is completely different. What matters is not only where the shot comes from, but how many options the attacker has available and how well the defending team manages to limit them.

The same principle shows up clearly in penalty killing too. A good penalty kill does not stop every shot, and it does not need to. What matters more is that the most dangerous passing lanes are closed and the opponent's options are limited. When the goalie knows better where the threat is most likely to come from, and what options the opponent has, his job gets considerably easier. A good penalty kill is often, above all, teamwork between the goalie and the skaters.

"That is why two shots that look identical in the stats can be situations of completely different difficulty from the goalie's point of view."

Exactly the same idea applies to offensive zone takeaways, which are among the most dangerous situations in hockey. This is not necessarily because the shot itself is of exceptional quality, but because the defence is often unorganised for a moment. Coverage assignments are shifting, there are several passing lanes, and the goalie has little time to read how the play is developing.

In situations like these, the expected value of the shot may look fairly ordinary statistically, but from the goalie's point of view the situation can be much harder. He is not only stopping a possible shot. He has to take into account, at the same time, the pass, the attacker moving to the back post, a possible screen and his own positioning in relation to all of these threats.

The goalie does not only stop shots. He stops options, above all.

The more options the attacker has available, the harder the situation becomes for the goalie. That is why two shots that look identical in the stats can be situations of completely different difficulty from the goalie's point of view. This is also one reason why a goalie's performance is hard to condense into a single percentage figure.

Performance is influenced not only by the goalie himself, but also by the environment, team structure, and playing style around him. Illustrative image generated with ChatGPT (AI).

"Same goalie. Same season. A very different environment. And as a result, very different stats."

If goalies were completely independent individual performers, their stats should look roughly the same regardless of the environment.

In reality that rarely happens. A good example is Juuse Saros.

In the 2025/26 NHL season, the Nashville Predators ended up missing the playoffs, allowed a lot of goals, and Saros faced more shots than any other goalie in the NHL. His goals against average was 3.16 and his save percentage 89.4%.

In the middle of the same season, at the Olympics, we saw a very different Saros. He backstopped Finland to bronze with numbers of 1.67 and 94.0%.

It is hard to believe that the goalie became a significantly better player in a few weeks. A more likely explanation is that the environment changed too. The Finnish national team played extremely organised and committed hockey in both directions, which left Saros with fewer uncontrollable situations to solve.

Same goalie. Same season. A very different environment. And as a result, very different stats.

This does not mean that all differences in goalies' stats are explained by the team. But it is a reminder that the environment matters more than we often think.

"In modern goaltending analysis, attention is increasingly focused on what kinds of situations the goalie faces."

So how should a goalie be evaluated? If save percentage and GAA mainly tell us the outcome, what should we look at instead? There is no single perfect stat, but in modern goaltending analysis attention is increasingly focused on what kinds of situations the goalie faces.

One of the most useful metrics is GSAx (Goals Saved Above Expected). It tells you how many goals more or fewer a goalie has prevented than could have been expected based on the situations he faced. A positive number means the goalie has allowed fewer goals than the quality of the situations would predict, and a negative number the opposite.

In addition, we can look at things like:

• SV% Above Expected: how much the goalie's save percentage exceeds or falls short of the level expected from the situations.

• High Danger SV%: how well the goalie stops the most dangerous scoring chances.

• Rebound stats: how often a save leads to a new dangerous scoring chance.

No single stat tells the whole truth, but they help us get closer to the core question: how well did the goalie actually play in relation to the situations he had to face?

"From this perspective, KooKoo's start to the season in Finland's Liiga is especially interesting."

The Saros example raises an interesting follow up question. If the environment can affect one of the best goalies in the world this much, how much can it affect a team that is going through bigger changes in its lineup and its daily routines?

From this perspective, KooKoo's start to the season in Finland's Liiga is especially interesting. Last season KooKoo did not only get good goaltending, but also exceptionally strong play against expected goals.

Eetu Randelin in particular was among the best in the Liiga even by advanced metrics. In the Liiga's xGAE model his season figure was about minus 24 goals, which in practice means he allowed clearly fewer goals than the situations he faced would have led you to expect. His save percentage was 90.83% at the same time.

This season the numbers look different. Randelin's xGAE has been minus 0.54 early on, and KooKoo's goalies combined are at about minus 6.3.

Judging by the numbers, the exceptionally strong performance against expected goals seen last season has not shown up at the same level early this season, at least. It is worth remembering, however, that the comparison pits a full regular season against an early season of only about ten games

Roughly speaking, last season KooKoo got more from its goalies than the situations would have led you to expect. So far this season there has been no similar safety margin.

What makes KooKoo interesting is that the operating environment has changed too. After last season the team lost several regulars, especially on defence. On top of that, the Champions Hockey League has brought more games, more travel and less practice time than in earlier seasons.

"The more relevant question is how much the goalies' operating environment has changed."

The early season struggles led to changes in the coaching staff. Head coach Jouko Myrrä and assistant coach Tuukka Poikonen were relieved of their duties, while the rest of the coaching staff, including goaltending coaching, continues as before. According to the club, the decision was based on an overall assessment of the team's situation.

For this reason, KooKoo's situation is hard to look at purely as a goaltending question. The stats show a change in both the goaltending and the operating environment at the same time. The question is not necessarily whether the explanation lies in the net, the defence or the offence, but in how all these factors affect one another.

The most interesting question is not whether the goalies are worse than a year ago. The more relevant question is how much their operating environment has changed.

When you add a weakened offensive game, a changed defence corps, the workload from the CHL and the less demanding goaltending of last season, a picture of the whole starts to form. Finding a single culprit is considerably harder than looking at save percentage. The answer is unlikely to be found in one player, one position or one stat. Not in KooKoo's case, and hardly ever in any situation.

"If goaltending happened in a vacuum, both Devon Levi and Tristan Jarry would have gone from terrible goalies to among the best in the NHL in one week."

A goalie should not be seen as an independent individual performer, but as part of a larger whole. Defending affects the goalie, attacking affects the goalie, puck possession affects the goalie. And in the same way, a good goalie affects the whole team's play in return.

The hottest topic of the NHL's opening week in Canada was where the Edmonton Oilers, who allowed 13 goals in their first two games, would find a new goalie. The Oilers' goaltending crisis is so chronic that the discussion starts up almost automatically at this time of year.

Strangely, the discussion has calmed down now that the Oilers have allowed only four goals in their next three games. If goaltending happened in a vacuum, both Devon Levi and Tristan Jarry would have gone from terrible goalies to among the best in the NHL in one week.

The Edmonton Oilers' opening week debate, the gap between Juuse Saros's NHL and Olympic stats, and KooKoo's current situation all point in the same direction. The first reaction is often to look for the problem in the net. The further you look into it, however, the more the focus shifts from the goalie himself to the environment he plays in.

Good defending does not only remove shots, but options. Good offence, in turn, does not only produce scoring chances for your own team, but also protects your own goalie. That is why a goalie should not be evaluated first through save percentage.

In the end, save percentage tells you the outcome.

Context tells you the cause.

***

Original article: https://www.meksi.fi/a/9869205

***

#progoaliecoach #IceHockey #GoalieCoaching #Finland #CoachesLife #HockeyCoach