Pass difficulty
77.8%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 30
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Bayern Munich · Left Wing · FWD
Actual completion
76.7%
23 completed passes
Pass difficulty
77.8%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.2 pp
-0.3 completions vs model expectation
Actual pass completion compared with the model's expected completion.
Player intelligence
FWD context · Each percentile is an empirical rank among eligible players in the same broad position group. Percentiles are not ratings.
Tendencies describe what a player attempts; higher is not automatically better.
Pass difficulty
77.8%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 30
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure pass rate
20.0%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 30
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
16.7%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 30
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
13.3%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 30
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
-2.9 units
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 30
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
406.0 units
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 30
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
3.333
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 30
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
41.2%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 51
requires 63 actions
Progressive carry rate
23.8%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 21
requires 29 carries
Progressive action rate
19.6%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 51
requires 63 actions
Under-pressure action rate
25.5%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 51
requires 63 actions
Shots / observed match
4.00 / match
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 4
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
8.7%
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 4
requires 20 shots
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.2 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 30
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
+4.1 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 6
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
+12.8 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 3 eligible peers · sample 5
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
+28.7 pp
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 1 eligible peers · sample 4
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.349
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 2 eligible peers · sample 4
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.080
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 51
requires 63 actions
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.443
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 19 eligible peers · sample 30
requires 36 passes
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.439
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 21
requires 29 carries
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
0.189
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 51
requires 63 actions
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.083
Unavailable among FWD players
n = 20 eligible peers · sample 51
requires 63 actions
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Limited sample for archetype analysis: requires 50 passes.
Archetypes describe outfield playing tendencies, not quality, ability, or rank.
Role Fit requires at least 50 passes and 29 carries in the product sample.
Expected Goals
Goals above expected is descriptive for this observed sample, not a definitive finishing-skill rating.
Shots
4
1 matches observed
Goals
0
Total xG
0.3
Goals above expected
-0.3
xG / shot
0.1
0.0% goals / shot
Limited sample: fewer than 20 non-penalty shots.
Campos visualization
Non-penalty xG is encoded by marker size and color. Preserved penalties have no modeled xG.
Attacking impact
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
-0.080
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.443
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.439
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
+0.189
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.083
51 actions · 30 passes · 21 carries · 31.4% increased attacking value
Campos visualization
Exact StatsBomb carry start/end locations. Green increases modeled possession value; coral decreases it.
6 attempts
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
5 attempts
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
4 attempts
Progressive-pass rate
16.7%
Pressure-pass rate
20.0%
Average forward distance
-2.9 m
Positive forward distance / 100
406.0 m
Final-third entries / 100
3.3
Campos visualization
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–30 of 30 passes
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.
V3.3B similarity requires an outfield player with at least 50 passes and 29 carries.
Sample support uses the lower observed-match count in each pair. Lower coverage means a measured profile may vary more with additional matches; it never changes the style similarity or ranking.
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.