Pass difficulty
79.8%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 84
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Mitchell Weiser
Werder Bremen · Right Wing Back · DEF
Matches observed2
Pass attempts84
Limited sampleActual completion
81.0%
68 completed passes
Pass difficulty
79.8%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
+1.2 pp
+1.0 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
26.2%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 84
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
19.0%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 84
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
16.7%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 84
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
3.7 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 84
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
753.5 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 84
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
8.333
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 84
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
43.8%
47th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 144
Progressive carry rate
9.5%
90th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 63
Progressive action rate
14.6%
81st percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 144
Under-pressure action rate
32.6%
98th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 144
Shots / observed match
0.50 / match
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
33.1%
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
+1.2 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 84
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
-0.7 pp
25th percentile among DEF players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 22
Progressive completion above expected
-4.3 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 16
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
-8.6 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 21 eligible peers · sample 14
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.331
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
0.032
66th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 144
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.084
29th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 81
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.182
93rd percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 63
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
0.024
67th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 144
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.092
96th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 144
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Safe Circulator
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Style separation0.023
Progressive-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty (higher)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (lower)
Long-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty-0.70 z
Under-pressure pass rate+2.52 z
Progressive-pass rate+0.39 z
Long-pass rate+0.11 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes-0.51 z
Carry share of actions-0.08 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 Bayer Leverkusen's observed DEF role.
#46 of 66Comparable external defensive candidatesRaw distance: 1.371
Lower distance means closer stylistic resemblance.
Closest stylistic dimensions
- Forward distance per 100 passes
- Carry involvement
- Long-pass rate
Largest stylistic difference
Passes under pressure
limited sampleObserved across 2 matchesRole: 34 matches · 9 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
1
1 matches observed
Goals
0
Total xG
0.3
Goals above expected
-0.3
xG / shot
0.3
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
xG0.33
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
+0.032
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.084
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.182
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
+0.024
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.092
144 actions · 81 passes · 63 carries · 49.3% 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
22 attempts
- Actual
- 77.3%
- Pass difficulty
- 77.9%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -0.7 pp
Progressive passing
16 attempts
- Actual
- 43.8%
- Pass difficulty
- 48.0%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -4.3 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
14 attempts
- Actual
- 50.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 58.6%
- Actual vs. expected passing
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
19.0%
Pressure-pass rate
26.2%
Average forward distance
3.7 m
Positive forward distance / 100
753.5 m
Final-third entries / 100
8.3
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–84 of 84 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 94.4%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- 0.0026
- Value before
- 0.0049
- Value after
- 0.0075
- Length
- 10.0 m
- Context
- Under pressure
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
67.3 / 100
Carry Share Of ActionsLong Pass RatePressure Pass Rate
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
65.4 / 100