Pass difficulty
86.8%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 71
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Leandro Barreiro Martins
FSV Mainz 05 · Right Defensive Midfield · MID
Matches observed2
Pass attempts71
Limited sampleActual completion
85.9%
61 completed passes
Pass difficulty
86.8%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-0.8 pp
-0.6 completions vs model expectation
Actual pass completion compared with the model's expected completion.
Player intelligence
Position profile
MID 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
21.1%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 71
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
8.5%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 71
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
7.0%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 71
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
1.3 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 71
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
592.3 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 71
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
4.225
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 71
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
44.8%
40th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 116
Progressive carry rate
0.0%
12th percentile among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 52
Progressive action rate
4.3%
23rd percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 116
Under-pressure action rate
21.6%
47th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 116
Shots / observed match
1.00 / match
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 2
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
10.0%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 2
requires 20 shots
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
-0.8 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 71
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
-1.1 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 10 eligible peers · sample 15
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
+4.4 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
-24.0 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 5
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.200
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 2
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.108
8th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 116
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.226
14th percentile among MID players
n = 58 eligible peers · sample 64
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.037
14th percentile among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 52
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.048
8th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 116
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.019
32nd percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 116
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Safe Circulator
Position-relative style among eligible MID players.
Style separation0.542
Progressive-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty (higher)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (lower)
Long-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty+0.14 z
Under-pressure pass rate+0.78 z
Progressive-pass rate-0.63 z
Long-pass rate-1.00 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes+0.00 z
Carry share of actions-0.21 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
MID role
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with Bayer Leverkusen's observed MID role.
#8 of 39Comparable external midfield candidatesRaw distance: 0.574
Lower distance means closer stylistic resemblance.
Closest stylistic dimensions
- Forward distance per 100 passes
- Expected completion rate
- Carry involvement
Largest stylistic difference
Passes under pressure
limited sampleObserved across 2 matchesRole: 34 matches · 10 contributors
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
2
1 matches observed
Goals
0
Total xG
0.2
Goals above expected
-0.2
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.
Shots2
Goals0
xG0.20
xG0.00 – 1.00
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
-0.108
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.226
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.037
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.048
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.019
116 actions · 64 passes · 52 carries · 45.7% 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
15 attempts
- Actual
- 80.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 81.1%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -1.1 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
6 attempts
- Actual
- 33.3%
- Pass difficulty
- 29.0%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +4.4 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
5 attempts
- Actual
- 60.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 84.0%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
8.5%
Pressure-pass rate
21.1%
Average forward distance
1.3 m
Positive forward distance / 100
592.3 m
Final-third entries / 100
4.2
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–71 of 71 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 16.6%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- 0.0574
- Value before
- 0.0488
- Value after
- 0.1062
- Length
- 5.9 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.
Limited sample: this player's style profile is based on 2 observed matches, so nearest-neighbor rankings may be less stable.
Style similarity
76.9 / 100
Pressure Pass RatePositive Forward Distance Per 100 PassesLong Pass Rate
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
74.9 / 100