Yeah, you totally cleared things up.
Your entire argument has been a straw man, goal-post shifting mess since it started. You can't use the argument of small sample size when the same thing applies to your side, for example.
The Canucks powerplay by all accounts should be much better than it is, and statistics back it up. You claim that because of some very bad puck luck, and forwards seemingly flubbing some good opportunities, our PP is awful, and will continue this way.
Which one of these arguments sounds more logical?