Pass difficulty
87.8%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 54
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Hoffenheim · Left Center Back · DEF
Actual completion
88.9%
48 completed passes
Pass difficulty
87.8%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
+1.0 pp
+0.6 completions vs model expectation
Actual pass completion compared with the model's expected completion.
Player intelligence
DEF context · Each percentile is an empirical rank among eligible players in the same broad position group. Percentiles are not ratings.
Tendencies describe what a player attempts; higher is not automatically better.
Pass difficulty
87.8%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 54
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure pass rate
14.8%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 54
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
11.1%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 54
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
11.1%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 54
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
3.8 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 54
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
810.4 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 54
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
9.259
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 54
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
43.5%
37th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 92
Progressive carry rate
2.5%
52nd percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 40
Progressive action rate
6.5%
28th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 92
Under-pressure action rate
17.4%
59th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 92
Shots / observed match
0.00 / match
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 0
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
—
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 0
metric unavailable
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
+1.0 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 54
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
+1.7 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 8
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
+0.9 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
+1.1 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 21 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
0.000
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 0
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.005
32nd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 92
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.047
47th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 52
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.049
34th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 40
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.037
22nd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 92
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.010
38th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 92
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Progressive-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty (higher)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (lower)
Long-pass rate (lower)
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
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with Bayer Leverkusen's observed DEF role.
Carry Share Of Actions
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.
Attacking impact
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
-0.005
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.047
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.049
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.037
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.010
92 actions · 52 passes · 40 carries · 54.3% increased attacking value
Campos visualization
Exact StatsBomb carry start/end locations. Green increases modeled possession value; coral decreases it.
8 attempts
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
6 attempts
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
6 attempts
Progressive-pass rate
11.1%
Pressure-pass rate
14.8%
Average forward distance
3.8 m
Positive forward distance / 100
810.4 m
Final-third entries / 100
9.3
Campos visualization
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–54 of 54 passes
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 1 observed match, so nearest-neighbor rankings may be less stable.
Style similarity
84.4 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches
Observed: 1 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
80.4 / 100
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches
Observed: 1 vs 1 matches
Style similarity
78.9 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches
Observed: 1 vs 1 matches
Style similarity
78.3 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches
Observed: 1 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
76.7 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches
Observed: 1 vs 20 matches
Style similarity
74.4 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches
Observed: 1 vs 21 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.