This is honestly why I don't bother commenting on these threads. Your response does not contribute to the conversation at all besides asserting your believe based on the fact that you can't be wrong.
I apologize for that - the incivility from my end was inappropriate.
However, my belief regarding the strength of correlation between outchancing and outshooting at the team level does, in fact, have a factual basis.
For example, quite a few bloggers counted scoring chances for a variety of teams over the 2010-11 NHL season. I happened to have collected data from all games for which scoring chances were counted. It turns out that there was scoring chances data for 386 out of the 1230 games played that year, which isn't bad.
For that 386 game sample, I took the trouble of calculating each team's:
1. Scoring Chance Ratio
2. Fenwick Ratio
3. Corsi Ratio
The correlation between Scoring Chance Ratio and Fenwick Ratio was substantial, at 0.82. The correlation between Scoring Chance Ratio and Corsi Ratio was high as well, although somewhat less so, at 0.69.
As both scoring chance ratio and fenwick/corsi ratio have a reliability lower than 1 over the sample in question, it bears mentioning that the correlations would be even higher if the correlations were disattenuated to account for this factor.
One problem with the data is that the number of games included for each team was not uniform. For example, there were only nine Chicago games in the sample, but 82 games from Montreal and Edmonton. This has the potential to skew things.
Fortunately, the correlations don't change much if we weight each team's data by the number of games played (or more precisely, aggregate fenwick for and against).
For example, the correlation between Fenwick Ratio and Scoring Chance Ratio drops only slightly to 0.81.
I intend to the same thing for the 2011-12 season once I obtain the necessary data.