Pass difficulty
79.8%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Borja Iglesias Quintas
Bayer Leverkusen · Center Forward · FWD
Matches observed7
Pass attempts77
Limited sampleActual completion
77.9%
60 completed passes
Pass difficulty
79.8%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.8 pp
-1.4 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
33.8%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
15.6%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
1.3%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
-2.3 units
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
296.0 units
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
3.896
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
49.7%
74th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 147
Progressive carry rate
5.5%
58th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 73
Progressive action rate
10.2%
32nd percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 147
Under-pressure action rate
40.8%
68th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 147
Shots / observed match
1.14 / match
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 8
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
10.1%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 8
requires 20 shots
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.8 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
+10.0 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 26
requires 10 eligible position peers
Progressive completion above expected
+3.1 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 12
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
+2.0 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 1 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.809
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 8
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.177
32nd percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 147
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.561
33rd percentile among FWD players
n = 19 eligible peers · sample 74
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.212
58th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 73
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
0.040
47th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 147
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.065
68th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 147
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Safe Circulator
Position-relative style among eligible FWD players.
Style separation0.553
Progressive-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty (higher)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (lower)
Long-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty+0.39 z
Under-pressure pass rate+1.40 z
Progressive-pass rate-0.35 z
Long-pass rate-1.23 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes-1.15 z
Carry share of actions+0.65 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
FWD role
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with the observed role of Leverkusen's other FWD contributors.
Role distance · lower is closer0.615
CloserFarther
Strongest alignment
- Positive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
- Expected Completion Rate
- Progressive Pass Rate
Largest difference
Carry Share Of Actions
higher sampleObserved across 7 matchesRole: 32 matches · 2 contributors
Limited contributor diversity: this leave-self-out role profile is based on 2 other contributing forwards across 32 observed matches.
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
8
5 matches observed
Goals
0
Total xG
0.8
Goals above expected
-0.8
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.
Shots8
Goals0
xG0.81
xG0.00 – 1.00
Foot
Header
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
-0.177
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.561
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.212
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
+0.040
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.065
147 actions · 74 passes · 73 carries · 42.2% 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
26 attempts
- Actual
- 84.6%
- Pass difficulty
- 74.6%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +10.0 pp
Progressive passing
12 attempts
- Actual
- 66.7%
- Pass difficulty
- 63.5%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +3.1 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
1 attempts
- Actual
- 100.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 98.0%
- Actual vs. expected passing
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
15.6%
Pressure-pass rate
33.8%
Average forward distance
-2.3 m
Positive forward distance / 100
296.0 m
Final-third entries / 100
3.9
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–77 of 77 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 77.4%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- 0.0208
- Value before
- 0.0251
- Value after
- 0.0459
- Length
- 20.8 m
- Context
- Progressive · Under pressure
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.
Style similarity
73.1 / 100
Carry Share Of ActionsLong Pass RatePositive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
Sample support: Higher · 7 limiting matches
Observed: 7 vs 20 matches
Style similarity
68.8 / 100
Expected Completion RateLong Pass Rate