Pass difficulty
69.6%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Yannik Keitel
Freiburg · Left Defensive Midfield · MID
Matches observed1
Pass attempts9
Limited sampleActual completion
55.6%
5 completed passes
Pass difficulty
69.6%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-14.1 pp
-1.3 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
22.2%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
22.2%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
22.2%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
8.7 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
1093.3 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
11.111
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
50.0%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 18
requires 63 actions
Progressive carry rate
0.0%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 29 carries
Progressive action rate
11.1%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 18
requires 63 actions
Under-pressure action rate
27.8%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 18
requires 63 actions
Shots / observed match
2.00 / match
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 2
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
12.8%
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
-14.1 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
+0.1 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 10 eligible peers · sample 2
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
-20.2 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 2
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
-14.0 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 2
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
0.744
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 2
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.876
Unavailable among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 18
requires 63 actions
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-1.888
Unavailable among MID players
n = 58 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 36 passes
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.137
Unavailable among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 9
requires 29 carries
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.599
Unavailable among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 18
requires 63 actions
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
-0.451
Unavailable among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 18
requires 63 actions
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Archetype unavailable
Limited sample for archetype analysis: requires 50 passes.
Archetypes describe outfield playing tendencies, not quality, ability, or rank.
Role Fit — Bayer Leverkusen
Role Fit unavailable
Role Fit requires at least 50 passes and 29 carries in the product sample.
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
1
Total xG
0.3
Goals above expected
+0.7
xG / shot
0.1
50.0% 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
Goals1
xG0.26
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
-0.876
Passing impact / 100 passes
-1.888
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.137
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.599
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
-0.451
18 actions · 9 passes · 9 carries · 38.9% 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
2 attempts
- Actual
- 50.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 49.9%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +0.1 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
2 attempts
- Actual
- 0.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 20.2%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -20.2 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
2 attempts
- Actual
- 50.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 64.0%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
22.2%
Pressure-pass rate
22.2%
Average forward distance
8.7 m
Positive forward distance / 100
1093.3 m
Final-third entries / 100
11.1
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–9 of 9 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 88.8%
- Outcome
- Incomplete
- Attacking impact
- -0.0195
- Value before
- 0.0195
- Value after
- 0.0000
- Length
- 7.8 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.
Playing-style similarity unavailable
V3.3B similarity requires an outfield player with at least 50 passes and 29 carries.
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.