Pass difficulty
85.6%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 79
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Angelo Stiller
VfB Stuttgart · Left Defensive Midfield · MID
Matches observed1
Pass attempts79
Limited sampleActual completion
88.6%
70 completed passes
Pass difficulty
85.6%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
+3.0 pp
+2.4 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
7.6%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 79
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
13.9%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 79
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
15.2%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 79
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
2.1 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 79
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
625.3 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 79
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
11.392
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 79
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
43.6%
27th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 133
Progressive carry rate
3.4%
52nd percentile among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 58
Progressive action rate
9.8%
62nd percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 133
Under-pressure action rate
14.3%
7th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 133
Shots / observed match
1.00 / match
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
3.9%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
+3.0 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 79
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
-1.6 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 10 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
+4.2 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 11
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
+9.5 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 12
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.039
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
0.035
70th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 133
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.054
61st percentile among MID players
n = 58 eligible peers · sample 75
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.149
72nd percentile among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 58
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.024
23rd percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 133
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.042
65th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 133
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Direct Progressor
Position-relative style among eligible MID players.
Style separation0.357
Progressive-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty (lower)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (higher)
Long-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty-0.11 z
Under-pressure pass rate-1.57 z
Progressive-pass rate+0.21 z
Long-pass rate+0.52 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes+0.27 z
Carry share of actions-0.55 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
MID role
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with Bayer Leverkusen's observed MID role.
Role distance · lower is closer0.797
CloserFarther
Strongest alignment
- Progressive Pass Rate
- Positive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
- Expected Completion Rate
Largest difference
Pressure Pass Rate
limited sampleObserved across 1 matchesRole: 34 matches · 10 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
+0.035
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.054
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.149
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.024
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.042
133 actions · 75 passes · 58 carries · 54.9% 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
6 attempts
- Actual
- 83.3%
- Pass difficulty
- 84.9%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -1.6 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
11 attempts
- Actual
- 36.4%
- Pass difficulty
- 32.2%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +4.2 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
12 attempts
- Actual
- 58.3%
- Pass difficulty
- 48.8%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
13.9%
Pressure-pass rate
7.6%
Average forward distance
2.1 m
Positive forward distance / 100
625.3 m
Final-third entries / 100
11.4
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–79 of 79 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 99.4%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- -0.0000
- Value before
- 0.0068
- Value after
- 0.0068
- Length
- 16.1 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
75.1 / 100
Positive Forward Distance Per 100 PassesExpected Completion RatePressure Pass Rate
Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches
Observed: 1 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
72.6 / 100