Pass difficulty
84.7%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 63
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Aïssa Bilal Laïdouni
Union Berlin · Left Defensive Midfield · MID
Matches observed2
Pass attempts63
Limited sampleActual completion
81.0%
51 completed passes
Pass difficulty
84.7%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-3.7 pp
-2.3 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
15.9%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 63
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
9.5%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 63
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
9.5%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 63
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
4.0 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 63
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
676.0 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 63
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
7.937
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 63
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
47.3%
63rd percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Progressive carry rate
5.8%
69th percentile among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 52
Progressive action rate
7.3%
43rd percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Under-pressure action rate
23.6%
57th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Shots / observed match
0.50 / match
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
3.3%
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
-3.7 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 63
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
-10.0 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 10 eligible peers · sample 10
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
+5.4 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
-1.9 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.033
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.013
48th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.106
47th percentile among MID players
n = 58 eligible peers · sample 58
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.090
54th percentile among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 52
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
0.018
52nd percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.014
27th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 110
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Safe Circulator
Position-relative style among eligible MID players.
Style separation0.213
Progressive-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty (higher)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (lower)
Long-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty-0.32 z
Under-pressure pass rate-0.13 z
Progressive-pass rate-0.47 z
Long-pass rate-0.54 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes+0.67 z
Carry share of actions+0.48 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 closer0.529
CloserFarther
Strongest alignment
- Pressure Pass Rate
- Long Pass Rate
- Carry Share Of Actions
Largest difference
Positive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
limited sampleObserved across 2 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
xG0.03
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
-0.013
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.106
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.090
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
+0.018
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.014
110 actions · 58 passes · 52 carries · 50.0% 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
- 80.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 90.0%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -10.0 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
6 attempts
- Actual
- 50.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 44.6%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +5.4 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
6 attempts
- Actual
- 66.7%
- Pass difficulty
- 68.6%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
9.5%
Pressure-pass rate
15.9%
Average forward distance
4.0 m
Positive forward distance / 100
676.0 m
Final-third entries / 100
7.9
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–63 of 63 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 98.9%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- -0.0029
- Value before
- 0.0132
- Value after
- 0.0102
- Length
- 10.7 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 2 observed matches, so nearest-neighbor rankings may be less stable.
Style similarity
76.6 / 100
Carry Share Of ActionsProgressive Pass RateLong Pass Rate
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
74.2 / 100