FSFootyScout
PlayersTeam IntelligenceScoutingLeaderboardCompareArchetypesModel

FootyScout · Football scouting and analytics

Based on available StatsBomb 2023/24 Bundesliga event data.

Player profile

Lucas Höler

Freiburg · Right Wing · FWD

Matches observed2
Pass attempts59
Limited sample

Actual 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.

Pass difficulty

70.9%

Unavailable among FWD players

n = 3 eligible peers · sample 59

requires 100 passes

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.

Leverkusen Role Fit

FWD role

How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with Bayer Leverkusen's observed FWD role.

Role distance · lower is closer1.733
CloserFarther

Strongest alignment

  • Long Pass Rate
  • Pressure Pass Rate
  • Progressive Pass Rate

Largest difference

Carry Share Of Actions

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 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.

Limited sample

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.

Reliable sample

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

Limited sample
Actual
50.0%
Pass difficulty
58.9%
Actual vs. expected passing
-8.9 pp

Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.

Progressive passing

12 attempts

Limited sample
Actual
66.7%
Pass difficulty
40.7%
Actual vs. expected passing
+26.0 pp

Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.

Long passing

7 attempts

Limited sample
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

Pass subset

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.

#1 · Same position group

Marvin Ducksch

Werder Bremen · Left Center Forward

Style similarity

74.3 / 100

Pressure Pass RateCarry Share Of ActionsLong Pass Rate

Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches

Observed: 2 vs 2 matches

#2 · Same position group

Brajan Gruda

FSV Mainz 05 · Right Wing

Style similarity

58.9 / 100

Actual vs. expected passing
-7.6 pp

Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.

Expected Completion RatePressure Pass RatePositive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes

Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches

Observed: 2 vs 2 matches

#3 · Same position group

Fares Chaïbi

Eintracht Frankfurt · Center Forward

Style similarity

58.1 / 100

Expected Completion RatePositive Forward Distance Per 100 PassesCarry Share Of Actions

Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches

Observed: 2 vs 2 matches

#4 · Same position group

Jae-Sung Lee

FSV Mainz 05 · Left Wing

Style similarity

50.1 / 100

Long Pass RatePressure Pass RateProgressive Pass Rate

Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches

Observed: 2 vs 2 matches

#5 · Same position group

Leroy Sané

Bayern Munich · Right Wing

Style similarity

47.8 / 100

Progressive Pass RateLong Pass RatePressure Pass Rate

Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches

Observed: 2 vs 2 matches

#6 · Same position group

Vincenzo Grifo

Freiburg · Left Wing

Style similarity

47.4 / 100

Positive Forward Distance Per 100 PassesExpected Completion RateCarry Share Of Actions

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.