Pass difficulty
82.5%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 65
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Edimilson Fernandes
FSV Mainz 05 · Left Center Back · DEF
Matches observed1
Pass attempts65
Limited sampleActual completion
86.2%
56 completed passes
Pass difficulty
82.5%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
+3.6 pp
+2.4 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
15.4%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 65
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
23.1%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 65
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
20.0%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 65
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
7.5 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 65
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
1050.8 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 65
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
16.923
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 65
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
46.2%
81st percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 117
Progressive carry rate
1.9%
44th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 54
Progressive action rate
12.0%
66th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 117
Under-pressure action rate
19.7%
72nd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 117
Shots / observed match
1.00 / match
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
4.5%
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
+3.6 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 65
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
+16.8 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 10
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
+10.0 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 15
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
+1.8 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 21 eligible peers · sample 13
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.045
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
0.113
92nd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 117
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
0.170
96th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 63
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.047
33rd percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 54
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
0.099
87th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 117
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.030
71st percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 117
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Direct Progressor
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Style separation0.402
Progressive-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty (lower)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (higher)
Long-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty-0.23 z
Under-pressure pass rate+0.56 z
Progressive-pass rate+0.94 z
Long-pass rate+0.61 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes+0.71 z
Carry share of actions+0.79 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 closer1.159
CloserFarther
Strongest alignment
- Carry Share Of Actions
- Pressure Pass Rate
- Expected Completion Rate
Largest difference
Positive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
limited sampleObserved across 1 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
0.0
Goals above expected
-0.0
xG / shot
0.0
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
xG0.04
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
+0.113
Passing impact / 100 passes
+0.170
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.047
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
+0.099
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.030
117 actions · 63 passes · 54 carries · 57.3% 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
10 attempts
- Actual
- 90.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 73.2%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +16.8 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
15 attempts
- Actual
- 46.7%
- Pass difficulty
- 36.7%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +10.0 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
13 attempts
- Actual
- 46.2%
- Pass difficulty
- 44.3%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
23.1%
Pressure-pass rate
15.4%
Average forward distance
7.5 m
Positive forward distance / 100
1050.8 m
Final-third entries / 100
16.9
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–65 of 65 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 93.8%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- 0.0022
- Value before
- 0.0060
- Value after
- 0.0082
- Length
- 16.2 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 1 observed match, so nearest-neighbor rankings may be less stable.
Style similarity
75.6 / 100
Long Pass RateProgressive Pass RatePositive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches
Observed: 1 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
75.6 / 100