Pass difficulty
75.0%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 62
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Chris Führich
VfB Stuttgart · Left Attacking Midfield · MID
Matches observed2
Pass attempts62
Limited sampleActual completion
72.6%
45 completed passes
Pass difficulty
75.0%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-2.4 pp
-1.5 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
12.9%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 62
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
19.4%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 62
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
11.3%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 62
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
2.2 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 62
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
589.2 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 62
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
3.226
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 62
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
51.8%
90th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Progressive carry rate
17.5%
98th percentile among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 57
Progressive action rate
17.3%
92nd percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Under-pressure action rate
20.9%
38th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Shots / observed match
3.00 / match
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
13.0%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 shots
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
-2.4 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 62
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
-8.8 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 10 eligible peers · sample 8
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
-3.9 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 12
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
-2.9 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 7
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
1.222
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
0.316
98th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
0.260
100th percentile among MID players
n = 58 eligible peers · sample 53
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.368
98th percentile among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 57
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
0.278
98th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.067
85th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Direct Progressor
Position-relative style among eligible MID players.
Style separation0.205
Progressive-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty (lower)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (higher)
Long-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty-2.43 z
Under-pressure pass rate-0.65 z
Progressive-pass rate+1.05 z
Long-pass rate-0.21 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes-0.02 z
Carry share of actions+1.76 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
MID role
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with Bayer Leverkusen's observed MID role.
Role distance · lower is closer1.423
CloserFarther
Strongest alignment
- Long Pass Rate
- Positive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
- Pressure Pass Rate
Largest difference
Expected Completion Rate
limited sampleObserved across 2 matchesRole: 34 matches · 10 contributors
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
6
2 matches observed
Goals
2
Total xG
0.8
Goals above expected
+1.2
xG / shot
0.1
33.3% 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.
Shots6
Goals2
xG0.78
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
+0.316
Passing impact / 100 passes
+0.260
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.368
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
+0.278
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.067
110 actions · 53 passes · 57 carries · 54.5% 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
8 attempts
- Actual
- 75.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 83.8%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -8.8 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
12 attempts
- Actual
- 41.7%
- Pass difficulty
- 45.6%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -3.9 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
7 attempts
- Actual
- 42.9%
- Pass difficulty
- 45.8%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
19.4%
Pressure-pass rate
12.9%
Average forward distance
2.2 m
Positive forward distance / 100
589.2 m
Final-third entries / 100
3.2
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–62 of 62 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 99.3%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- -0.0036
- Value before
- 0.0097
- Value after
- 0.0061
- Length
- 16.5 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
59.5 / 100
Carry Share Of ActionsExpected Completion RateLong Pass Rate
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
58.5 / 100