not everyone can elaborate like you
What else was I supposed to say?
I mean, yeah, charts have datas in them, some of which must challenge a common positions regarding something or someone. Most of you know this already; "I don't need your fancy stats to tell me X is good", etc. There's no point to charts which do nothing but repeat consensus. People are complaining about 5-6 data points here. Out of what? 150? That's a well within any acceptable margins. If anything, it's not, but that's because 5-6's not enough to be meaningful.
I'm possibly the biggest critic of scoring chances in the forum. I've already discussed why in this thread: it's data binning, you can't WOWY it, it's built on false assumptions, it's built on anti-corsi sentiments and so on. They are completely useless and I long for the days they leave the discourse and are replaced by carry-ins%, stretch passes, pass leading to shots and so on.
short answer: I think a WAR model will or at least should be the future of hockey analytics.
long answer:
This is what I said half a year ago in this thread and I still feel this way. I used to believe should be, in programming-speak, a double[] instead of simple double variable. However, I feel like I exaggerated the importance of chemistry, roles, needs, fitting systems, etc and underestimed the chaotic nature of the game. I have a more "teams need the best players and that's it" black and white mindset.