sorry, this 4th placed ranking is my homerism?
Stat is no good for individual players but okay for teams? How does that work, exactly? I distinctly recall you finding it problematic because it isolates defense and offense and the two are supposedly indistinguishable in hockey.
According to xGF%, Nick Holden is the best defensemen in the NHL.
1. So its always incomplete. the true sign of a good team or player is how much they outproduce what they allow - regardless of what kind of system or style they play. that's a huge deal by itself that makes uaing the number in isolation fairly useless unless you're trying to describe a very specific result rather than describe actual quality, but at least that's the extent of the issue when it comes to using them individually for teams - but not so for individuals.
2. teams as a whole have the same situational use and quality of competition as each other. they all play all the roles against all the competition in all the different usages. individuals, on the other hand, play in vastly different roles with vastly different usage against drastically different quality of competition with drastically different teammates in different systems. and all that is piled ON TOP of the already incomplete nature of using only one half of the equation to describe a player's offense or defense. it is totally unsurprising that a guy who plays against elite tough qoc on one of the worst xga teams in the league would end up with one of the worst xga in the league. this doesn't actually tell us he is bad defensively though.
Didn't have time for this word soup yesterday but ...
1. You talk about xGA/60 being in isolation, as if that's something unique about it. xGF% is an isolated stat -- it measures shot location. Why is that 'isolation' okay? Further, there's nothing isolated about it. It's one half of what goes into xGF%. This is akin to saying that we don't like scoring chance measurement because it is isolated from shots. It's nonsense.
2. This is true for every single player stat used. Nothing suggests that usage is uniquely troublesome for xGA. xGA is not incomplete; it's expected goals against. It's only 'incomplete' if you make a fetish of xGF%.