For my sense of Analytics in hockey, it's much more about finding players who help complete your roster and making the best use of your dollars. I don't think it's much about beating the market as a small payroll team.
They're the same thing. You just have a much smaller market to do it in, with few secrets in hockey. Grossmann is an objectively bad player from an analytical standpoint. A traditionalist (say, Brian Burke) would value his physical presence. An analaytics guy would favor a more rounded player that can actually move the puck up the ice, even if they aren't as big.
The problem with measuring hockey is that it's fluid. Baseball is very easy to measure, and in almost every respect it's a collection of individuals performing. Hockey is different. A player could be inexplicably bad or good with another on their line or as a pairing. You really won't know until you try it. The best you can do is project.
Richardson is a cheap enough forward that can play all three positions. He is the opposite of Grossmann. Richardson is the definition of looking for aggregate value. There's nothing about him that you could say would definitively make a roster better, yet he does. If you had six Richardsons in your bottom six, you'd be a pretty good team.
I have no problem with Chayka's thought process on that player. My problem is with the power dynamic. It's pretty clear that nobody wanted the job, or worse, they just gave it to a stooge that was happy to sit in the chair. Chayka could be the most brilliant mind in hockey and it's not going to matter if DT has the final say and can basically push through whatever he wants. It's not even about whether or not you like DT as a coach, that kind of power dynamic is just dysfunctional.
Coaches coach. Managers manage. Players play. This is the way it is for all 29 other teams, with few exceptions, yet the Coyotes think they can be the exception. This experiment is going to run in the most crucial year ever of the rebuild. It's going to take place over what should be a very transformative summer. If you had to pick a year where you either needed a complete fresh start or continuity, this summer is it. Ownership managed to pick the worst of three options, and then (if Chayka is named) managed to squander what little potential there was for improvement.
Even if Chayka is great in the future, he will need to learn on the job, and this isn't the atmosphere to be learning in. You need to cultivate relationships over years to be able to function as a good GM. The challenge for Maloney was very large this summer, even with his experience. The challenge for Chayka is that much harder.
This will probably not end well.