The "Wilder was more attacking last season" Myth

[CentralQuay]

We didn't 'create the least chances'. We had the fewest shots, which isn't a great metric to be using tbh. If you look at out xg we were 15th, not great but certainly not the sitsry in the league. If you look at big chances created we were joint 9th (same as Arsenal).

We've never been a team that shoot on sight, largely because it's very rarely the option that's most likely to result in a goal.

So teams scored more because they would shoot on sight, but shooting on sight rarely leads to more goals?

I'm confused.

 

[Foody]

So teams scored more because they would shoot on sight, but shooting on sight rarely leads to more goals?

I'm confused.

No, teams don't score more by shooting more. That is exactly the point I'm making. It's about creating more high quality shooting opportunities. That is why I'm saying your assertion that last season we created the fewest chances is wrong .
You keep relying on the fact we didn't shoot much last season as evidence that we weren't very attacking. My point is, that you are ignoring tactics and the quality of chances.