Pass difficulty
85.2%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Player profile
FC Heidenheim · Right Center Back · DEF
Actual completion
84.1%
69 completed passes
Pass difficulty
85.2%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.0 pp
-0.8 completions vs model expectation
Actual pass completion compared with the model's expected completion.
Player intelligence
DEF context · Each percentile is an empirical rank among eligible players in the same broad position group. Percentiles are not ratings.
Tendencies describe what a player attempts; higher is not automatically better.
Pass difficulty
85.2%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure pass rate
12.2%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
15.9%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
18.3%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
8.6 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
1117.0 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
8.537
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
43.4%
34th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 122
Progressive carry rate
0.0%
16th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 53
Progressive action rate
6.6%
29th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 122
Under-pressure action rate
14.8%
43rd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 122
Shots / observed match
0.00 / match
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 0
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
—
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 0
metric unavailable
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.0 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
+3.2 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 10
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
+1.2 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 13
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
+0.5 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 21 eligible peers · sample 15
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
0.000
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 0
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.001
33rd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 122
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.034
52nd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 69
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.041
26th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 53
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.024
26th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 122
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.022
58th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 122
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Progressive-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty (lower)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (higher)
Long-pass rate (higher)
Bars are z-scores relative to eligible positional peers, not percentiles or ratings. Distance-based style separation, not a probability. Smaller values mean the player lies nearer the boundary between the two archetypes.
Leverkusen Role Fit
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with Bayer Leverkusen's observed DEF role.
Positive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
Role Fit measures how closely a player's observed playing style resembles Bayer Leverkusen's observed positional-role style. It does not predict transfer success or future performance.
Attacking impact
Measures how much each pass or carry changed the expected attacking value of a possession. Positive values improved the attack; negative values reduced it.
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.001
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.034
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.041
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.024
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.022
122 actions · 69 passes · 53 carries · 57.4% increased attacking value
Campos visualization
Exact StatsBomb carry start/end locations. Green increases modeled possession value; coral decreases it.
10 attempts
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
13 attempts
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
15 attempts
Progressive-pass rate
15.9%
Pressure-pass rate
12.2%
Average forward distance
8.6 m
Positive forward distance / 100
1117.0 m
Final-third entries / 100
8.5
Campos visualization
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–82 of 82 passes
Style similarity compares position-relative playing style across passing and carrying tendencies. Scores are not ability ratings.
100 means identical observed profiles; 50 is about the median same-position playing style match. Not a probability.
Limited sample: this player's style profile is based on 2 observed matches, so nearest-neighbor rankings may be less stable.
Style similarity
90.1 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
87.2 / 100
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
84.4 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
82.1 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 1 matches
Style similarity
79.4 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
77.7 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Sample support uses the lower observed-match count in each pair. Lower coverage means a measured profile may vary more with additional matches; it never changes the style similarity or ranking.