Why are off target shots worth zero?

Because xGOT asks how likely a shot was to beat the goalkeeper once it was struck. A shot that misses the target was never going to be saved, so it carries no post-shot value at all, however good the chance was.

Is xGOT the same thing as post-shot xG?

Yes. xGOT stands for expected goals on target, and it is the same metric as post-shot expected goals or PSxG. Different providers picked different names for it: broadcasters and Opta tend to say xGOT, while FBref and StatsBomb say PSxG. The calculation is the same in each case, valuing the shot by where it was placed once struck. This site labels it xGOT.

What does it say about goalkeepers?

Compared against goals actually conceded, it is the standard measure of shot stopping. A keeper who concedes fewer goals than the xGOT of the shots they faced is outperforming what a typical keeper would be expected to do.

How is xGOT different from ordinary xG?

xG values the chance before the shot: the position, the angle, the pressure. xGOT re-values it after the shot, using where it actually travelled. A tap-in scuffed wide keeps its pre-shot xG for that scenario, but scores zero on xGOT, because it never threatened the goal once struck.

Can xGOT be higher than xG on the same shot?

Yes, and that gap is the whole point of the metric. A low-probability chance from a tight angle, placed perfectly into the far corner, can carry a higher post-shot value than its pre-shot value suggested. That gap is credited entirely to execution.

Does a header work the same way?

The mechanics are identical: only headers that stay on target get a post-shot value. Power and placement still matter, though headers on average carry less pace than shots struck with the foot, which shows up in lower post-shot values from similar positions.

Expected Goals on Target

xGOT

Expected goals on target, or xGOT, values a shot after it has been struck, taking placement and power into account, so only shots on target carry any value. It is also called post-shot xG, or PSxG.

Why it matters. It isolates striking quality. A player whose xGOT beats their expected goals is placing shots well, not merely finding good positions.

Figures from xG Stat’s own models, built on Wyscout event data. Updated 16 August 2026.

What changes once the ball is struck

Ordinary xG is a before-the-fact number. It looks at where a shot was taken from, the angle available, the pressure the shooter was under. Of every shot like this, it asks, how many go in? It has no idea where the ball actually travelled, because the shot has not been struck yet.

xGOT asks a narrower, after-the-fact question. Once the shot is on its way, it looks at:

Placement. How close to the corners, how far from the goalkeeper.
Power. How much time the goalkeeper actually had to react.
Trajectory. The flight of the ball rather than the shooter's position.

Two consequences follow directly from that.

Off target shots score zero. A shot that misses the frame was never going to trouble the goalkeeper, whatever the underlying chance was worth before it was struck.
The same chance can score very differently on each metric. A tight angle chance placed perfectly in the top corner can carry a higher xGOT than its pre-shot xG. A wide open chance blazed over the bar scores well on xG and zero on xGOT.

Where the ball goes, and what it is worth

Shot placement	xGOT against xG	What it tells you
Bottom corner, with pace	Well above	Elite placement, the finish a keeper cannot reach
Top corner from the edge of the box	Above	Worldie territory, rare and high skill
Straight at the keeper, central	Below	A decent chance wasted, keeper friendly
Hard and low at the near post under pressure	About level	Solid contact, average placement
Penalty placed rather than driven	Above	Placement beats the fixed penalty baseline
Dragged on target but tame and late	Well below	On target only nominally, little goal threat

The pattern is the point. A shot is worth what it threatened once it left the boot, not what the chance looked like beforehand.

xGOT rewrites three verdicts

The clinical finisher. A striker whose xGOT consistently sits above their xG is placing shots into the corners, not straight at the goalkeeper. That is a striking skill, separate from getting into good positions. The gap between the two numbers is exactly where it shows up.

The great save that was not actually great. A commentator calls a stop "world class." Check the shot's xGOT. At around 0.85, the goalkeeper was heavily favoured to make that save before it even reached them, placement and power included. Reflexes still mattered, but the outcome was closer to expected than the reaction suggested.

The keeper who keeps clean sheets they should not. Add up the xGOT of every shot a goalkeeper faces across a season, then compare it with goals actually conceded. A keeper conceding meaningfully fewer than that total is outperforming what an average goalkeeper would do against the same shots. That is over and above whatever their defence achieved in front of them.

The misreadings, corrected

"xGOT is a goalkeeping stat." It measures the shot, not either player alone. Compared with goals conceded, it evaluates a keeper. Compared with pre-shot xG, it evaluates a shooter. Same number, two different jobs, depending on which side of the shot you look from.

"A big save always means the shot should have been a goal." Not necessarily. A shot with a low xGOT that gets saved was already unlikely to beat the goalkeeper. The save can look spectacular on screen while the underlying number says it was the expected outcome most of the time.

"xGOT and xG measure the same skill." They measure two skills either side of the same shot. xG measures the ability to get into a position to shoot. xGOT measures what happens once the shot is away. Confusing the two blurs shot selection with shot execution, which are coached separately for a reason.

Most post-shot expected goals

2025/26 final

1E. HaalandManchester City22.7
2Igor ThiagoBrentford20.0
3O. WatkinsAston Villa17.1
4D. Calvert-LewinLeeds United14.7
5M. Gibbs-WhiteNottingham Forest14.2
6A. SemenyoManchester City13.7
7B. ŠeškoManchester United13.7
8E. FernándezChelsea13.2
9J. MatetaCrystal Palace12.8
10João PedroChelsea12.3

See every player's numbersData to Mon 25 May, 15:00

FAQ

Related terms

See xGOT across the Premier League

Every player, team and match measured on the chances created rather than the scoreline.