Pass difficulty
70.9%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 59
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Lucas Höler
Freiburg · Right Wing · FWD
Matches observed2
Pass attempts59
Limited sampleActual completion
72.9%
43 completed passes
Pass difficulty
70.9%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
+1.9 pp
+1.1 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
23.7%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 59
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
20.3%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 59
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
11.9%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 59
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
5.7 units
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 59
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
877.8 units
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 59
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
18.644
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 59
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
38.4%
16th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 86
Progressive carry rate
3.0%
18th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 33
Progressive action rate
15.1%
68th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 86
Under-pressure action rate
27.9%
16th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 86
Shots / observed match
1.50 / match
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 3
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
10.7%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 3
requires 20 shots
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
+1.9 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 59
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
-8.9 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 14
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
+26.0 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 12
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
-7.6 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 1 eligible peers · sample 7
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.322
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 3
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.056
63rd percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 86
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.195
67th percentile among FWD players
n = 19 eligible peers · sample 53
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.169
37th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 33
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
0.032
42nd percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 86
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
-0.064
5th percentile among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 86
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Direct Progressor
Position-relative style among eligible FWD players.
Style separation0.479
Progressive-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty (lower)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (higher)
Long-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty-1.10 z
Under-pressure pass rate+0.11 z
Progressive-pass rate+0.10 z
Long-pass rate-0.22 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes+1.33 z
Carry share of actions-1.31 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.
Role Fit
FWD role
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with Bayer Leverkusen's observed FWD role.
#6 of 8Comparable external forward candidatesRaw distance: 1.733
Lower distance means closer stylistic resemblance.
Closest stylistic dimensions
- Long-pass rate
- Passes under pressure
- Progressive passing rate
Largest stylistic difference
Carry involvement
limited sampleObserved across 2 matchesRole: 33 matches · 3 contributors
Limited contributor diversity: this role profile is based on three contributing forwards across 33 observed matches and is more sensitive to individual-player composition than the DEF and MID profiles.
Role Fit compares observed playing style. It does not predict player quality, 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
3
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.
Shots3
Goals0
xG0.32
xG0.00 – 1.00
Foot
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
-0.056
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.195
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.169
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
+0.032
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
-0.064
86 actions · 53 passes · 33 carries · 39.5% 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
14 attempts
- Actual
- 50.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 58.9%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -8.9 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
12 attempts
- Actual
- 66.7%
- Pass difficulty
- 40.7%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +26.0 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
7 attempts
- Actual
- 71.4%
- Pass difficulty
- 79.0%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
20.3%
Pressure-pass rate
23.7%
Average forward distance
5.7 m
Positive forward distance / 100
877.8 m
Final-third entries / 100
18.6
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–59 of 59 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 55.7%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- 0.0054
- Value before
- 0.0119
- Value after
- 0.0173
- Length
- 12.3 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
74.3 / 100
Pressure Pass RateCarry Share Of ActionsLong Pass Rate
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
58.9 / 100