Pass difficulty
90.0%
82nd percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 1423
Player profile
Bayer Leverkusen · Left Center Back · DEF
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
DEF context · Each percentile is an empirical rank among eligible players in the same broad position group. Percentiles are not ratings.
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
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
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Progressive-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty (higher)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (lower)
Long-pass rate (lower)
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
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with the observed role of Leverkusen's other DEF contributors.
Progressive Pass Rate
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
Goals above expected is descriptive for this observed sample, not a definitive finishing-skill rating.
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
Non-penalty xG is encoded by marker size and color. Preserved penalties have no modeled xG.
Attacking impact
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
+0.027
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
Exact StatsBomb carry start/end locations. Green increases modeled possession value; coral decreases it.
141 attempts
110 attempts
136 attempts
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
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–200 of 1,423 passes
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.
Style similarity
91.2 / 100
Sample support: Higher · 21 limiting matches
Observed: 25 vs 21 matches
Style similarity
90.6 / 100
Sample support: Higher · 25 limiting matches
Observed: 25 vs 31 matches
Style similarity
80.9 / 100
Sample support: Higher · 20 limiting matches
Observed: 25 vs 20 matches
Style similarity
79.9 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 25 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
79.6 / 100
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 25 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
77.0 / 100
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.