Pass difficulty
85.5%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 89
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Diogo Filipe Monteiro Pinto Leite
Union Berlin · Left Center Back · DEF
Matches observed2
Pass attempts89
Limited sampleActual completion
84.3%
75 completed passes
Pass difficulty
85.5%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.2 pp
-1.1 completions vs model expectation
Actual pass completion compared with the model's expected completion.
Player intelligence
Position profile
DEF context · Each percentile is an empirical rank among eligible players in the same broad position group. Percentiles are not ratings.
Insufficient eligible position metrics for a meaningful radar.
Style
Tendencies describe what a player attempts; higher is not automatically better.
Under-pressure pass rate
13.5%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 89
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
15.7%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 89
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
16.9%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 89
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
6.8 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 89
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
1034.7 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 89
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
14.607
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 89
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
43.6%
44th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 149
Progressive carry rate
1.5%
41st percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 65
Progressive action rate
10.1%
51st percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 149
Under-pressure action rate
15.4%
48th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 149
Shots / observed match
0.50 / match
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
6.3%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.2 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 89
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
+5.5 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 12
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
-10.2 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 14
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
-11.6 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 21 eligible peers · sample 15
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.063
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.045
13th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 149
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.098
25th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 84
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.024
10th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 65
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.050
10th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 149
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.004
26th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 149
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Direct Progressor
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Style separation0.077
Progressive-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty (lower)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (higher)
Long-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty+0.28 z
Under-pressure pass rate+0.22 z
Progressive-pass rate-0.07 z
Long-pass rate+0.14 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes+0.64 z
Carry share of actions-0.12 z
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
DEF role
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with Bayer Leverkusen's observed DEF role.
Role distance · lower is closer0.865
CloserFarther
Strongest alignment
- Expected Completion Rate
- Pressure Pass Rate
- Progressive Pass Rate
Largest difference
Positive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
limited sampleObserved across 2 matchesRole: 34 matches · 9 contributors
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.
Expected Goals
Non-penalty shooting
Goals above expected is descriptive for this observed sample, not a definitive finishing-skill rating.
Shots
1
1 matches observed
Goals
0
Total xG
0.1
Goals above expected
-0.1
xG / shot
0.1
0.0% goals / shot
Limited sample: fewer than 20 non-penalty shots.
Campos visualization
Shot map
Non-penalty xG is encoded by marker size and color. Preserved penalties have no modeled xG.
Shots1
Goals0
xG0.06
xG0.00 – 1.00
Green outline = GoalNormal outline = Non-goal
Attacking impact
Impact of passes and carries
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
-0.045
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.098
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.024
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.050
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.004
149 actions · 84 passes · 65 carries · 49.0% increased attacking value
Campos visualization
Carry value map
Exact StatsBomb carry start/end locations. Green increases modeled possession value; coral decreases it.
Situational execution
Under pressure
12 attempts
- Actual
- 83.3%
- Pass difficulty
- 77.8%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +5.5 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
14 attempts
- Actual
- 28.6%
- Pass difficulty
- 38.8%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -10.2 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
15 attempts
- Actual
- 40.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 51.6%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
15.7%
Pressure-pass rate
13.5%
Average forward distance
6.8 m
Positive forward distance / 100
1034.7 m
Final-third entries / 100
14.6
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–89 of 89 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 87.4%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- 0.0000
- Value before
- 0.0045
- Value after
- 0.0045
- Length
- 3.6 m
- Context
- Standard
Event clocks are not retained in the pass API.
Similar playing styles
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
Progressive Pass RateExpected Completion RateCarry Share Of Actions
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
85.7 / 100