The Hasselblad is very likely to have a high saturation capacity, that's why their highlights are less likely to be blown out, but you couldn't get much information from the shadows.
Actually the Hasselblad H3DII_50 doesn't really have an unusually high "full well" or saturation capacity. It is, for example, lower than a camera with a similar pixel size that was also released in 2007: the Canon 1Ds Mark III (see http://www.sensorgen.info/). The Hasselblad also has more background noise, and a lower quantum efficiency. All-in-all the medium format sensors consistently under-perform in terms of dynamic range (especially considering that they should be able to outperform smaller sensors).
The rest of your analysis sounds sensible to me: it is easy to avoid blown highlights (for any saturation capacity) by appropriately (under)exposing. But that brings you uncomfortably close to the noise floor for scenes with dark shadows. I find it harder to judge whether or when people should care about this.