Pass difficulty
78.9%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 69
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Benjamin Henrichs
RB Leipzig · Right Back · DEF
Matches observed2
Pass attempts69
Limited sampleActual completion
78.3%
54 completed passes
Pass difficulty
78.9%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-0.6 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.
Insufficient eligible position metrics for a meaningful radar.
Style
Tendencies describe what a player attempts; higher is not automatically better.
Under-pressure pass rate
5.8%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 69
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
26.1%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 69
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
18.8%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 69
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
5.5 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 69
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
1005.5 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 69
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
10.145
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 69
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
46.9%
88th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 128
Progressive carry rate
5.0%
78th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 60
Progressive action rate
16.4%
87th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 128
Under-pressure action rate
15.6%
49th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 128
Shots / observed match
3.00 / match
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
6.4%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 shots
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
-0.6 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 69
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
-23.1 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 4
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
-4.4 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 18
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
+7.9 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 21 eligible peers · sample 13
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.384
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.033
17th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 128
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.253
8th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 68
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.215
94th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 60
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.041
15th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 128
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.069
90th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 128
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Direct Progressor
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Style separation0.407
Progressive-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty (lower)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (higher)
Long-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty-0.85 z
Under-pressure pass rate-1.18 z
Progressive-pass rate+1.36 z
Long-pass rate+0.44 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes+0.52 z
Carry share of actions+1.05 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 closer1.336
CloserFarther
Strongest alignment
- Carry Share Of Actions
- Pressure Pass Rate
- Long Pass Rate
Largest difference
Progressive 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
6
2 matches observed
Goals
0
Total xG
0.4
Goals above expected
-0.4
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.
Shots6
Goals0
xG0.38
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
-0.033
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.253
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.215
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.041
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.069
128 actions · 68 passes · 60 carries · 54.7% 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
4 attempts
- Actual
- 50.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 73.1%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -23.1 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
18 attempts
- Actual
- 38.9%
- Pass difficulty
- 43.3%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -4.4 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
13 attempts
- Actual
- 46.2%
- Pass difficulty
- 38.2%
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
26.1%
Pressure-pass rate
5.8%
Average forward distance
5.5 m
Positive forward distance / 100
1005.5 m
Final-third entries / 100
10.1
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–69 of 69 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 99.5%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- -0.0001
- Value before
- 0.0031
- Value after
- 0.0031
- Length
- 20.2 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 2 observed matches, so nearest-neighbor rankings may be less stable.
Style similarity
78.6 / 100
Long Pass RateCarry Share Of ActionsPositive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
76.7 / 100