Pass difficulty
85.7%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 91
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Timo Hübers
FC Köln · Right Center Back · DEF
Matches observed2
Pass attempts91
Limited sampleActual completion
84.6%
77 completed passes
Pass difficulty
85.7%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.1 pp
-1.0 completions vs model expectation
Actual pass completion compared with the model's expected completion.
Player intelligence
Position profile
DEF 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
13.2%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 91
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
12.1%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 91
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
19.8%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 91
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
6.7 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 91
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
1078.0 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 91
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
5.495
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 91
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
43.4%
33rd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 143
Progressive carry rate
0.0%
16th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 62
Progressive action rate
4.9%
14th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 143
Under-pressure action rate
16.8%
54th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 143
Shots / observed match
0.50 / match
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
7.5%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.1 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 91
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
+5.9 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 12
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
-10.9 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 11
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
-11.2 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 21 eligible peers · sample 18
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.075
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
0.005
43rd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 143
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.014
60th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 81
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.031
19th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 62
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.019
31st percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 143
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.027
63rd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 143
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Direct Progressor
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Style separation0.080
Progressive-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty (lower)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (higher)
Long-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty+0.32 z
Under-pressure pass rate+0.16 z
Progressive-pass rate-0.57 z
Long-pass rate+0.58 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes+0.82 z
Carry share of actions-0.22 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
DEF role
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with Bayer Leverkusen's observed DEF role.
Role distance · lower is closer0.996
CloserFarther
Strongest alignment
- Progressive Pass Rate
- Pressure Pass Rate
- Expected Completion Rate
Largest difference
Positive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
limited sampleObserved across 2 matchesRole: 34 matches · 9 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
1
1 matches observed
Goals
0
Total xG
0.1
Goals above expected
-0.1
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.
Shots1
Goals0
xG0.08
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
+0.005
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.014
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.031
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.019
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.027
143 actions · 81 passes · 62 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
12 attempts
- Actual
- 91.7%
- Pass difficulty
- 85.7%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +5.9 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
11 attempts
- Actual
- 27.3%
- Pass difficulty
- 38.2%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -10.9 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
18 attempts
- Actual
- 50.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 61.2%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
12.1%
Pressure-pass rate
13.2%
Average forward distance
6.7 m
Positive forward distance / 100
1078.0 m
Final-third entries / 100
5.5
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–91 of 91 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 99.8%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- 0.0003
- Value before
- 0.0028
- Value after
- 0.0031
- Length
- 23.4 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
87.6 / 100
Pressure Pass RateCarry Share Of ActionsExpected Completion Rate
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
87.2 / 100