Pass difficulty
79.7%
5th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 342
Player profile
Nathan Tella
Bayer Leverkusen · Right Wing Back · DEF
Matches observed24
Pass attempts342
Reliable sampleActual completion
81.3%
278 completed passes
Pass difficulty
79.7%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
+1.6 pp
+5.4 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.
Style
Performance
0–100 empirical percentiles among eligible same-position peers.
Style
Tendencies describe what a player attempts; higher is not automatically better.
Under-pressure pass rate
11.7%
55th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 342
Progressive pass rate
17.0%
82nd percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 342
Long-pass rate
7.9%
5th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 342
Average forward distance
-1.9 units
9th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 342
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
370.0 units
5th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 342
Final-third entries / 100 passes
3.509
5th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 342
Carry share of actions
51.3%
100th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 665
Progressive carry rate
12.0%
95th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 341
Progressive action rate
14.0%
77th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 665
Under-pressure action rate
22.6%
84th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 665
Shots / observed match
0.88 / match
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 21
requires 10 eligible position peers
xG / shot
12.0%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 21
requires 10 eligible position peers
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
+1.6 pp
68th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 342
Under-pressure completion above expected
+4.5 pp
83rd percentile among DEF players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 40
Progressive completion above expected
+4.2 pp
50th percentile among DEF players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 58
Long-pass completion above expected
-5.8 pp
5th percentile among DEF players
n = 21 eligible peers · sample 27
Goals above expected
2.482
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 21
requires 10 eligible position peers
Overall impact / 100 actions
0.096
91st percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 665
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.042
48th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 324
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.227
95th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 341
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
0.174
96th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 665
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.073
92nd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 665
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Safe Circulator
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Style separation0.301
Progressive-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty (higher)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (lower)
Long-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty-0.71 z
Under-pressure pass rate-0.11 z
Progressive-pass rate+0.10 z
Long-pass rate-1.20 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes-2.09 z
Carry share of actions+2.63 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.
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.
#9 of 9Comparable current-team defensive profilesRaw distance: 1.140
Lower distance means closer stylistic resemblance.
Closest stylistic dimensions
- Passes under pressure
- Long-pass rate
- Progressive passing rate
Largest stylistic difference
Carry involvement
higher sampleObserved across 24 matchesRole: 34 matches · 8 contributors
Role Fit compares observed playing style. It does not predict player quality, 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
21
11 matches observed
Goals
5
Total xG
2.5
Goals above expected
+2.5
xG / shot
0.1
23.8% goals / shot
Campos visualization
Shot map
Non-penalty xG is encoded by marker size and color. Preserved penalties have no modeled xG.
Shots21
Goals5
xG2.52
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.
Overall impact / 100 actions
+0.096
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.042
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.227
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
+0.174
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.073
665 actions · 324 passes · 341 carries · 49.6% 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
40 attempts
- Actual
- 77.5%
- Pass difficulty
- 73.0%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +4.5 pp
Progressive passing
58 attempts
- Actual
- 51.7%
- Pass difficulty
- 47.5%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +4.2 pp
Long passing
27 attempts
- Actual
- 44.4%
- Pass difficulty
- 50.2%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -5.8 pp
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
17.0%
Pressure-pass rate
11.7%
Average forward distance
-1.9 m
Positive forward distance / 100
370.0 m
Final-third entries / 100
3.5
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–200 of 342 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 78.2%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- 0.0057
- Value before
- 0.0318
- Value after
- 0.0375
- Length
- 12.8 m
- Context
- Progressive
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.
Style similarity
84.9 / 100
Progressive Pass RateLong Pass RateExpected Completion Rate
Sample support: Higher · 24 limiting matches
Observed: 24 vs 31 matches
Style similarity
67.9 / 100
Progressive Pass RatePositive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes