Pass difficulty
86.8%
50th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 126
Player profile
Willian Joel Pacho Tenorio
Eintracht Frankfurt · Left Center Back · DEF
Matches observed2
Pass attempts126
Reliable sampleActual completion
86.5%
109 completed passes
Pass difficulty
86.8%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-0.3 pp
-0.4 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
20.6%
95th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 126
Progressive pass rate
15.1%
73rd percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 126
Long-pass rate
22.2%
86th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 126
Average forward distance
8.1 units
91st percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 126
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
1087.4 units
86th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 126
Final-third entries / 100 passes
12.698
100th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 126
Carry share of actions
43.8%
51st percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 210
Progressive carry rate
0.0%
16th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 92
Progressive action rate
7.1%
34th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 210
Under-pressure action rate
24.3%
90th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 210
Shots / observed match
0.50 / match
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
10.9%
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
-0.3 pp
27th percentile among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 126
Under-pressure completion above expected
+0.4 pp
50th percentile among DEF players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 26
Progressive completion above expected
-5.7 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 19
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
-5.6 pp
10th percentile among DEF players
n = 21 eligible peers · sample 28
Goals above expected
-0.109
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
0.034
68th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 210
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
0.026
78th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 118
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.044
29th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 92
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.001
47th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 210
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.039
83rd percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 210
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Direct Progressor
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Style separation0.083
Progressive-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty (lower)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (higher)
Long-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty+0.51 z
Under-pressure pass rate+1.51 z
Progressive-pass rate-0.16 z
Long-pass rate+0.95 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes+0.86 z
Carry share of actions-0.05 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 closer1.267
CloserFarther
Strongest alignment
- Expected Completion Rate
- Progressive Pass Rate
- Carry Share Of Actions
Largest difference
Long Pass Rate
limited sampleObserved across 2 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
0.1
Goals above expected
-0.1
xG / shot
0.1
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
xG0.11
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
+0.034
Passing impact / 100 passes
+0.026
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.044
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.001
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.039
210 actions · 118 passes · 92 carries · 59.5% 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
26 attempts
- Actual
- 84.6%
- Pass difficulty
- 84.2%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +0.4 pp
Progressive passing
19 attempts
- Actual
- 31.6%
- Pass difficulty
- 37.2%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -5.7 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
28 attempts
- Actual
- 50.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 55.6%
- Actual vs. expected passing
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
15.1%
Pressure-pass rate
20.6%
Average forward distance
8.1 m
Positive forward distance / 100
1087.4 m
Final-third entries / 100
12.7
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–126 of 126 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 29.0%
- Outcome
- Incomplete
- Attacking impact
- —
- Value before
- —
- Value after
- —
- Length
- 43.6 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.
Limited sample: this player's style profile is based on 2 observed matches, so nearest-neighbor rankings may be less stable.
Style similarity
78.4 / 100
Carry Share Of ActionsExpected Completion RatePositive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
Sample support: Limited · 1 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 1 matches
Style similarity
77.0 / 100