Pass difficulty
72.6%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 36
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Karim Onisiwo
FSV Mainz 05 · Center Forward · FWD
Matches observed2
Pass attempts36
Limited sampleActual completion
72.2%
26 completed passes
Pass difficulty
72.6%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-0.4 pp
-0.1 completions vs model expectation
Actual pass completion compared with the model's expected completion.
Player intelligence
Position profile
FWD 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
22.2%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 36
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
13.9%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 36
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
8.3%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 36
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
0.1 units
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 36
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
400.8 units
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 36
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
2.778
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 36
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
47.1%
58th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 68
Progressive carry rate
3.1%
29th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 32
Progressive action rate
8.8%
21st percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 68
Under-pressure action rate
45.6%
89th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 68
Shots / observed match
2.00 / match
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 4
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
7.3%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 4
requires 20 shots
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
-0.4 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 36
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
+10.6 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 8
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
-14.7 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 5
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
+27.4 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 1 eligible peers · sample 3
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.292
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 4
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.041
68th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 68
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.198
61st percentile among FWD players
n = 19 eligible peers · sample 36
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.134
32nd percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 32
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
0.062
58th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 68
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.058
58th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 68
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Archetype unavailable
Limited sample for archetype analysis: requires 50 passes.
Archetypes describe outfield playing tendencies, not quality, ability, or rank.
Role Fit — Bayer Leverkusen
Role Fit unavailable
Role Fit requires at least 50 passes and 29 carries in the product sample.
Expected Goals
Non-penalty shooting
Goals above expected is descriptive for this observed sample, not a definitive finishing-skill rating.
Shots
4
2 matches observed
Goals
0
Total xG
0.3
Goals above expected
-0.3
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.
Shots4
Goals0
xG0.29
xG0.00 – 1.00
Foot
Header
Corner
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
-0.041
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.198
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.134
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
+0.062
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.058
68 actions · 36 passes · 32 carries · 39.7% 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
8 attempts
- Actual
- 87.5%
- Pass difficulty
- 76.9%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +10.6 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
5 attempts
- Actual
- 20.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 34.7%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -14.7 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
3 attempts
- Actual
- 100.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 72.6%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
13.9%
Pressure-pass rate
22.2%
Average forward distance
0.1 m
Positive forward distance / 100
400.8 m
Final-third entries / 100
2.8
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–36 of 36 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 95.7%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- -0.0078
- Value before
- 0.0154
- Value after
- 0.0076
- Length
- 5.5 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.
Playing-style similarity unavailable
V3.3B similarity requires an outfield player with at least 50 passes and 29 carries.
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.