Player profile

Anthony Losilla

Bochum · Center Defensive Midfield · MID

Matches observed2

Pass attempts42

Limited sample

Actual completion

90.5%

38 completed passes

Pass difficulty

86.8%

How difficult a pass was to complete.

Actual vs. expected passing

+3.7 pp

+1.5 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.

Pass difficulty

86.8%

Unavailable among MID players

n = 13 eligible peers · sample 42

requires 100 passes

Under-pressure pass rate

14.3%

Unavailable among MID players

n = 13 eligible peers · sample 42

requires 100 passes

Progressive pass rate

11.9%

Unavailable among MID players

n = 13 eligible peers · sample 42

requires 100 passes

Long-pass rate

14.3%

Unavailable among MID players

n = 13 eligible peers · sample 42

requires 100 passes

Average forward distance

3.0 units

Unavailable among MID players

n = 13 eligible peers · sample 42

requires 100 passes

Positive forward distance / 100 passes

795.2 units

Unavailable among MID players

n = 13 eligible peers · sample 42

requires 100 passes

Final-third entries / 100 passes

11.905

Unavailable among MID players

n = 13 eligible peers · sample 42

requires 100 passes

Carry share of actions

30.4%

Unavailable among MID players

n = 61 eligible peers · sample 56

requires 63 actions

Progressive carry rate

0.0%

Unavailable among MID players

n = 66 eligible peers · sample 17

requires 29 carries

Progressive action rate

7.1%

Unavailable among MID players

n = 61 eligible peers · sample 56

requires 63 actions

Under-pressure action rate

19.6%

Unavailable among MID players

n = 61 eligible peers · sample 56

requires 63 actions

Shots / observed match

0.50 / match

Unavailable among MID players

n = 5 eligible peers · sample 1

requires 20 shots

xG / shot

7.4%

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 42

requires 100 passes

Under-pressure completion above expected

+18.4 pp

Unavailable among MID players

n = 10 eligible peers · sample 6

requires 20 pressure passes

Progressive completion above expected

+3.7 pp

Unavailable among MID players

n = 9 eligible peers · sample 5

requires 20 progressive passes

Long-pass completion above expected

+7.5 pp

Unavailable among MID players

n = 9 eligible peers · sample 6

requires 20 long passes

Goals above expected

-0.074

Unavailable among MID players

n = 5 eligible peers · sample 1

requires 20 shots

Overall impact / 100 actions

-0.040

Unavailable among MID players

n = 61 eligible peers · sample 56

requires 63 actions

Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.

Passing impact / 100 passes

-0.085

53rd percentile among MID players

n = 58 eligible peers · sample 39

Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.

Carrying impact / 100 carries

0.064

Unavailable among MID players

n = 66 eligible peers · sample 17

requires 29 carries

Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.

Progressive-action impact / 100 actions

-0.004

Unavailable among MID players

n = 61 eligible peers · sample 56

requires 63 actions

Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.

Under-pressure impact / 100 actions

0.057

Unavailable among MID players

n = 61 eligible peers · sample 56

requires 63 actions

Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.

Playing style

Archetype unavailable

Limited sample for archetype analysis: requires 50 passes.

Archetypes describe outfield playing tendencies, not quality, ability, or rank.

Role Fit — Bayer Leverkusen

Role Fit unavailable

Role Fit requires at least 50 passes and 29 carries in the product sample.

Expected Goals

Non-penalty shooting

Goals above expected is descriptive for this observed sample, not a definitive finishing-skill rating.

Limited sample

Shots

1 matches observed

Goals

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

xG0.07

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.

Limited sample

Overall impact / 100 actions

-0.040

Passing impact / 100 passes

-0.085

Carrying impact / 100 carries

+0.064

Progressive-action impact / 100 actions

-0.004

Under-pressure impact / 100 actions

+0.057

56 actions · 39 passes · 17 carries · 37.5% 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

6 attempts

Limited sample

Actual: 100.0%
Pass difficulty: 81.6%
Actual vs. expected passing: +18.4 pp

Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.

Progressive passing

5 attempts

Limited sample

Actual: 40.0%
Pass difficulty: 36.3%
Actual vs. expected passing: +3.7 pp

Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.

Long passing

6 attempts

Limited sample

Actual: 66.7%
Pass difficulty: 59.2%

Progression profile

Progressive-pass rate

11.9%

Pressure-pass rate

14.3%

Average forward distance

3.0 m

Positive forward distance / 100

795.2 m

Final-third entries / 100

11.9

Campos visualization

Pass map

Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.

Showing 1–42 of 42 passes

Pass subset

Pass difficulty

Analytical view

CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure

Inspect a pass in this view

Pass difficulty: 99.8%
Outcome: Completed
Attacking impact: -0.0041
Value before: 0.0096
Value after: 0.0055
Length: 30.4 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.

Playing-style similarity unavailable

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.