You want ME to weigh in on your interpretation of advanced stats? Quant isn't arithmetic. It is an analytical methodology. The obtuse need not apply because if I had a year, you wouldn't learn a thing based on your track record.
There you go skirting the question again and making it personal. I'll make it more clear, because you seem to be struggling with answering actual advanced stat questions.
This is an advanced stats professionals opinion on xgf% (not mine):
Question: What do you value more? GF% or xGF% or both, and why?
@MikeKellyNHL: Both are important. I place more value on expected goal differential in terms of understanding how well a player, a line or a team is playing from a process standpoint. This tends to affect GF% more than vice-versa. Over long samples, GF% will paint a fairly accurate picture but small sample, xGF% more indicative of play. It also eliminates the massive variable that is goaltending at both ends of the ice.
This is Marners xGF% with Matthews: 55.43%
This is Marners xGF% without Matthews: 46.73%
This is Matthews xGF% without Marner: 55.43%
Okay, now is the time to show your incredible advanced stats knowledge. What does this stat tell you?