No, because those players take a lot of shots full stop. The whole point of that "less than 0.5 xG chance" is that for every one of those you score, the average footballer shooting from there (which is not they drop every footballer in the top leagues there and make them shoot, it's a measure which is historical so highly weighted towards the type of player that will usually take shots from there) will miss one. For every 3 0.3 xG chances a player scores they will miss 7.
And one of the things that football supporters don't seem to grasp is that xG volume is the main predictor of goals, not xG overperformance. Great goal scorers aren't great, in the vast majority of times, because they're supreme finishers. They're great because they're supreme chance-getters. Son, who might be the best finisher we have data of this kind for, has a league career over-performance of about 31%. Messi is at about 15%. Kane 13%. These are the best of the best.
Ronaldo for instance, since 2014 when data is available to his last year at United, scored 234 goals from an xG of 229.4. So an overperformance of 4.5 goals (which is less than 2%, well inside any margin of error). More interestingly though, he underperformed his xG in 6 of 9 seasons, and without his monster season in 14-15 he'd actually under perform his xG by about 2%.
It's very, very rare for players to consistently exceed their xG by any significant margin. Of the 7 players who have scored 15 goals in the Prem this year 4 have over-performed, 3 have under performed. Of the 5 in La Liga it's 2 over-performed, 3 under. Serie A only have 2, but it's 50:50. Salah has 4 over-performing and 4 under-performing seasons in the PL, Haaland has 1-2, Isak 2-1... You get the gist. You become a great scorer by getting lots of chances, ideally high quality ones. That's what results in players hitting sustainably high goal numbers.
