Pass difficulty
67.2%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Marius Wolf
Borussia Dortmund · Right Back · DEF
Matches observed2
Pass attempts82
Limited sampleActual completion
69.5%
57 completed passes
Pass difficulty
67.2%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
+2.3 pp
+1.9 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
6.1%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
32.9%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
23.2%
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
7.8 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
1233.2 units
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
12.195
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
38.2%
5th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 123
Progressive carry rate
2.1%
48th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 47
Progressive action rate
21.1%
95th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 123
Under-pressure action rate
8.9%
15th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 123
Shots / observed match
0.50 / match
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
8.6%
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
+2.3 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 23 eligible peers · sample 82
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
-21.3 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 5
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
+13.4 pp
100th percentile among DEF players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 27
Long-pass completion above expected
+17.8 pp
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 21 eligible peers · sample 19
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
-0.086
Unavailable among DEF players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 1
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.073
11th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 123
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.143
19th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 76
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.041
24th percentile among DEF players
n = 87 eligible peers · sample 47
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
0.026
68th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 123
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
-0.025
5th percentile among DEF players
n = 94 eligible peers · sample 123
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Direct Progressor
Position-relative style among eligible DEF players.
Style separation0.423
Progressive-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty (lower)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (higher)
Long-pass rate (higher)
Pass difficulty-2.87 z
Under-pressure pass rate-1.12 z
Progressive-pass rate+2.30 z
Long-pass rate+1.09 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes+1.46 z
Carry share of actions-2.07 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.
#66 of 66Comparable external defensive candidatesRaw distance: 2.538
Lower distance means closer stylistic resemblance.
Closest stylistic dimensions
- Passes under pressure
- Long-pass rate
- Forward distance per 100 passes
Largest stylistic difference
Expected completion rate
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
0.1
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
xG0.09
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
-0.073
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.143
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.041
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
+0.026
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
-0.025
123 actions · 76 passes · 47 carries · 56.9% 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
5 attempts
- Actual
- 40.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 61.3%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -21.3 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
27 attempts
- Actual
- 59.3%
- Pass difficulty
- 45.9%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +13.4 pp
Long passing
19 attempts
- Actual
- 63.2%
- Pass difficulty
- 45.4%
- Actual vs. expected passing
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
32.9%
Pressure-pass rate
6.1%
Average forward distance
7.8 m
Positive forward distance / 100
1233.2 m
Final-third entries / 100
12.2
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–82 of 82 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 41.9%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- 0.0020
- Value before
- 0.0124
- Value after
- 0.0144
- Length
- 4.0 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
61.9 / 100
Progressive Pass RatePressure Pass RatePositive Forward Distance Per 100 Passes
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
60.5 / 100