I appreciate your post and I agree that you've got a point, however, I just want to nitpick slightly here and be a huge dipshit for doing so:
I really dislike how 'high danger' chances are calculated. For instance, let's say that a puck rebounds into the slot and a player takes a whack at it. There might be 4 bodies stacked up, making it completely impossible to get the puck on the net... but it doesn't matter, that's still a 'high danger' scoring chance.
Also, when you're shooting the puck 2 feet wide of the net or directly into the goalie's chest (a problem for everyone on this team not named Verhaeghe right now), then that's also a little misleading.
If that's you being a dipshit, you might be the nicest person I've interacted with on the internet.
All stats are a simplification of "watch the tapes a couple of times to catch all the details". So it won't paint a perfect picture, but it should be able to tell a good story without being misleading. All teams every year have these poor HDchances, so over the course of a year, it balances out.
I presume you think we are bad to mediocre at converting our HDchances, I do too. And you'd be right, we are 15th. So yes, seeing so many poor opportunities and missed golden opportunities is seared in our frontal cortex, but still, we are 2nd in HDgoals.
That's less obvious, but if we think about it, it makes sense. We are abyssal overall in SH%, but we are above average in GF, so we must be great at something else, and that's generating gritty/garbage/rebound/deflection opportunities.
I don't disagree that this strategy seems pointless and it's annoying at time, but I like seeing Tkachuk somehow scoring 1 feet away from the goalie.
