This is a particularly misleading use of stats.
Firstly, xG is shown rather than G. That is, the number of goals the average player would be expected to score given the chances that Ramsey/Alli have had rather than the goals actually scored.
This means that Ramsey should have scored a lot more goals than Alli, given the chances they've had. It is all the more impressive, then, that Alli has scored so many more than Ramsey.
People often say that xG is better predictor of future goals than G alone. I do not know enough about what the evidence for this is, but it seems likely that it only applies to teams as a whole, rather than individual players. Good finishers regularly outperform their xG over a sustained period of time. Harry Kane, for example, outperformed his xG last season by more than 50%.
In this regard, Ramsay is notable for underperforming his xG by a huge margin. In other words, he has been extremely bad at finishing during the last year.
Other aspects in which Ramsey has outperformed Alli include number of times dispossessed(??)
Not sure what I + T means, but apparently Ramsey is good at it.
In fairness, the passing percentage seems fairly reasonable...