I'm a little surprised we're first in HDCF/60. But I'd expect top 10 for sure. However, I'm highly skeptical that we're 29th in xGA/60. How is that even possible for us to have a lot of goals expected against us if we're 2nd best in corsi for % and 3rd in goals for %? Are we expected to win every game 13-6? Also, how is it that we have the best GF-GA, but are not also best in goals for %? Maybe I just don't understand these metrics.
I think it makes sense.
1) GF-GA that I listed is all strengths, where as all later on metrics I listed are 5v5. We have a good PP and good PK so that affects the overall number of GF-GA. Canes have only given up 7 goals when playing 4-5 and scored 12 for instance, so it IS the reason why we are 3rd in 5v5 GF% while having the best overall GF-GA. The GF% is only 5v5.
2) CF and CA are just shots on goal, no matter where they are taken. The Canes shoot from everywhere so that makes sense. Again what I listed is 5v5 only.
3) xG is simply the statistical chance of an unblocked shot becoming a goal. The higher danger a shot is, the more it affects xG. Again, it's 5v5.
Therefore, you can take a lot of shots and not have a very high xGF number if the shots aren't high danger. On the flip side, you can give up few shots, but if the % of them are higher danger shots, your xGA number can be high even though total shots is low.
So in the Canes case, they don't give up a lot of total shots 5v5, but the % of those that they do give up that are high danger is high, thus the ranking for xGA/60 and HDCA/60. The two go hand in hand. The reason that we aren't ACTUALLY giving up a lot of goals even though the expected goals against is high is that our goaltending has been very good.
The data is FAR from perfect, but in this case, I think the numbers (in general) make sense from what I see on the ice.
