FSFootyScout
PlayersTeam IntelligenceScoutingLeaderboardCompareArchetypesModel

FootyScout · Football scouting and analytics

Based on available StatsBomb 2023/24 Bundesliga event data.

Player profile

Piero Martín Hincapié Reyna

Bayer Leverkusen · Left Center Back · DEF

Matches observed25
Pass attempts1,423
Reliable sample

Actual completion

92.3%

1,314 completed passes

Pass difficulty

90.0%

How difficult a pass was to complete.

Actual vs. expected passing

+2.3 pp

+32.9 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.

102030405060708090Under-pressure pass rateProgressive pass rateLong-pass rateProgressive carry rateActual vs. expected passingCarrying impact / 100 carries
Style
Performance
0–100 empirical percentiles among eligible same-position peers.

Style

Tendencies describe what a player attempts; higher is not automatically better.

Pass difficulty

90.0%

82nd percentile among DEF players

n = 23 eligible peers · sample 1423

Under-pressure pass rate

9.9%

27th percentile among DEF players

n = 23 eligible peers · sample 1423

Progressive pass rate

7.7%

14th percentile among DEF players

n = 23 eligible peers · sample 1423

Long-pass rate

9.6%

14th percentile among DEF players

n = 23 eligible peers · sample 1423

Average forward distance

4.8 units

45th percentile among DEF players

n = 23 eligible peers · sample 1423

Positive forward distance / 100 passes

744.8 units

45th percentile among DEF players

n = 23 eligible peers · sample 1423

Final-third entries / 100 passes

8.433

55th percentile among DEF players

n = 23 eligible peers · sample 1423

Carry share of actions

45.7%

73rd percentile among DEF players

n = 94 eligible peers · sample 2551

Progressive carry rate

2.4%

50th percentile among DEF players

n = 87 eligible peers · sample 1165

Progressive action rate

5.2%

16th percentile among DEF players

n = 94 eligible peers · sample 2551

Under-pressure action rate

10.8%

23rd percentile among DEF players

n = 94 eligible peers · sample 2551

Shots / observed match

0.72 / match

Unavailable among DEF players

n = 4 eligible peers · sample 18

requires 20 shots

xG / shot

12.3%

Unavailable among DEF players

n = 4 eligible peers · sample 18

requires 20 shots

Performance

Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.

Actual vs. expected passing

+2.3 pp

86th percentile among DEF players

n = 23 eligible peers · sample 1423

Under-pressure completion above expected

+4.4 pp

75th percentile among DEF players

n = 13 eligible peers · sample 141

Progressive completion above expected

+5.3 pp

63rd percentile among DEF players

n = 17 eligible peers · sample 110

Long-pass completion above expected

+4.1 pp

90th percentile among DEF players

n = 21 eligible peers · sample 136

Goals above expected

-1.212

Unavailable among DEF players

n = 4 eligible peers · sample 18

requires 20 shots

Overall impact / 100 actions

0.027

60th percentile among DEF players

n = 94 eligible peers · sample 2551

Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.

Passing impact / 100 passes

-0.007

63rd percentile among DEF players

n = 94 eligible peers · sample 1386

Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.

Carrying impact / 100 carries

0.067

58th percentile among DEF players

n = 87 eligible peers · sample 1165

Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.

Progressive-action impact / 100 actions

-0.001

46th percentile among DEF players

n = 94 eligible peers · sample 2551

Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.

Under-pressure impact / 100 actions

0.020

57th percentile among DEF players

n = 94 eligible peers · sample 2551

Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.

Playing style

Safe Circulator

Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.

Style separation0.694

↓Progressive-pass rate (lower)

↑Pass difficulty (higher)

↓Positive forward distance / 100 passes (lower)

↓Long-pass rate (lower)

Pass difficulty+1.07 z
Under-pressure pass rate-0.43 z
Progressive-pass rate-1.17 z
Long-pass rate-0.95 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes-0.55 z
Carry share of actions+0.61 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 the observed role of Leverkusen's other DEF contributors.

Role distance · lower is closer0.412
CloserFarther

Strongest alignment

  • Long Pass Rate
  • Carry Share Of Actions
  • Positive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes

Largest difference

Progressive Pass Rate

higher sampleObserved across 25 matchesRole: 34 matches · 8 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.

Limited sample

Shots

18

13 matches observed

Goals

1

Total xG

2.2

Goals above expected

-1.2

xG / shot

0.1

5.6% 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.

Shots18
Goals1
xG2.21
xG0.00 – 1.00
Foot
Header
Corner
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.

Reliable sample

Overall impact / 100 actions

+0.027

Passing impact / 100 passes

-0.007

Carrying impact / 100 carries

+0.067

Progressive-action impact / 100 actions

-0.001

Under-pressure impact / 100 actions

+0.020

2,551 actions · 1,386 passes · 1,165 carries · 58.7% 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

141 attempts

Reliable sample
Actual
80.9%
Pass difficulty
76.4%
Actual vs. expected passing
+4.4 pp

Progressive passing

110 attempts

Reliable sample
Actual
54.5%
Pass difficulty
49.2%
Actual vs. expected passing
+5.3 pp

Long passing

136 attempts

Reliable sample
Actual
70.6%
Pass difficulty
66.5%
Actual vs. expected passing
+4.1 pp

Progression profile

Progressive-pass rate

7.7%

Pressure-pass rate

9.9%

Average forward distance

4.8 m

Positive forward distance / 100

744.8 m

Final-third entries / 100

8.4

Campos visualization

Pass map

Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.

Showing 1–200 of 1,423 passes

Pass subset

CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
Pass difficulty
97.4%
Outcome
Completed
Attacking impact
0.0010
Value before
0.0171
Value after
0.0181
Length
13.8 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.

#1 · Same position group

Odilon Kossonou

Bayer Leverkusen · Right Center Back

Style similarity

91.2 / 100

Positive Forward Distance Per 100 PassesExpected Completion RatePressure Pass Rate

Sample support: Higher · 21 limiting matches

Observed: 25 vs 21 matches

#2 · Same position group

Jonathan Tah

Bayer Leverkusen · Center Back

Style similarity

90.6 / 100

Carry Share Of ActionsPositive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
Long Pass Rate

Sample support: Higher · 25 limiting matches

Observed: 25 vs 31 matches

#3 · Same position group

Josip Stanišić

Bayer Leverkusen · Right Center Back

Style similarity

80.9 / 100

Carry Share Of ActionsPositive Forward Distance Per 100 PassesLong Pass Rate

Sample support: Higher · 20 limiting matches

Observed: 25 vs 20 matches

#4 · Same position group

Julian Ryerson

Borussia Dortmund · Left Back

Style similarity

79.9 / 100

Pressure Pass RateProgressive Pass RateCarry Share Of Actions

Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches

Observed: 25 vs 2 matches

#5 · Same position group

Min Jae Kim

Bayern Munich · Left Center Back

Style similarity

79.6 / 100

Expected Completion RatePressure Pass RateProgressive Pass Rate

Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches

Observed: 25 vs 2 matches

#6 · Same position group

Christian Groß

Werder Bremen · Center Back

Style similarity

77.0 / 100

Long Pass RateProgressive Pass RatePositive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes

Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches

Observed: 25 vs 1 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.