It uses the elements to determine this, according to Perry’s model, are shot type (wrist shot, slap shot, deflection, etc.), shot distance (adjusted distance from the net), shot angle (angle in absolute degrees at which shot was taken), whether or not the shot was a rebound, whether or not the shot was a rush shot (or off the rush), and the strength state (5v5 vs. power play).

By combining these elements, we can get a better idea of how well an individual player or a team has been performing in terms of how many goals they should be scoring. If you want to view how a team is doing in xG, the quickest way is to take it as a percentage, like with Corsi. You can go to corsica.hockey and whether you look at teams or individual skaters you would look at the xGF% column. This stat, like Corsi, can and should be adjusted for score and venue.

The development of this stat is important because it says more than “take more shots and you’ll score more goals.” That’s a true statement, but we know not all shots are created equally — in fact, that’s the central pillar of xG. For example, shots taken down low (in the “high-danger” areas) have a higher likelihood of going in the net than do shots from the outside (in the “medium-danger” or “low-danger” areas).