العربيةSeason2025/262026 · this seasonAll seasons
Building the full report
Combining every season — this one is larger, give it a moment.
Vision AI ← BACK TO SEARCH
Player reportSerie A 2026

Pervis Estupiñán

AC Milan
Ball-winning 6 (destroyer) DM
14.9 defensive actions/90
defensive middeep-lying playmakerpress resistancescreening
410
minutes
8 apps
288
passes
89% completed
89%
pass completion
288 passes
16
progressive passes
3.5/90
68
defensive actions
14.9/90
17
tackles + interceptions
67% tackle win
14
recoveries
3.1/90
23
line-breaking passes
5.0/90
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

Thin sample this season. Pervis Estupiñán has played 8 matches (410 min) so far, so sections that need a bigger sample to say anything reliable are not shown here — they are missing on purpose, not broken. See all seasons combined →
01

What Patterns Define Him?

His repeatable signature. A step only appears if its reliability score (sample size × match coverage) reaches at least Medium confidence — pattern mining, not anecdotes.

RECEIVE
drop between the centre-backs — mostly in the middle third (57% of his 288 passes)
89% completion · 288× in 8/8 matches
↓
PROGRESS CENTRAL
break a line through the middle
3.5 prog/90 · 23× in 7/8 matches
↓
SCREEN / WIN BALL
protect the back four
6.8 ball-wins/90 · 31× in 8/8 matches
↓
RECYCLE / PROGRESS
keep it ticking, feed the final third
1.5 f3-entries/90 · 7× in 4/8 matches
Signature: Receive → Progress Central → Screen / Win Ball → Recycle / Progress — the only steps proven repeatable this season (4 of 5 in the full pattern). Not enough evidence yet for the rest of the chain below.
Not a pattern: escape pressure — 1× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet) — omitted from the signature rather than presented as one.
02

defensive mid radar — percentile vs his peers

hierarchical score 63/100

A position-aware radar: these 10 axes are the metrics that matter for a defensive mid. Each axis is his percentile among the 52 defensive mids in the league (min 450 min). (padj) = possession-adjusted: defensive volumes are scaled by how much defending his team actually does, so opportunity is not confused with ability. Def height = the average pitch position of his defensive actions (0 = own goal line, 100 = opponent's goal line) — a higher number means he defends further up the pitch, not that he defends "better".

Pass %60% · #21/52(85.60)Progressive/9087% · #7/52(6.00)Line-breaks/9081% · #10/52(2.04)xT/9071% · #15/52(1.09)xA/9017% · #43/52(0.03)Dribble %17% · #43/52(30.00)Def actions/90 (padj)92% · #4/52(16.23)Recoveries/90 (padj)92% · #4/52(5.36)Def height13% · #45/52(33.28)Duel win %52% · #24/52(28.57)
Radar read: elite for def actions/90 (padj) (92%), recoveries/90 (padj) (92%), progressive/90 (87%); weakest axes def height (13%), xa/90 (17%). Percentiles, not raw values — 50% = league-average defensive mid.
League distribution — every dot a defensive mid, dashed cross = league average, diamond = him
X Y
Full context table — him vs league average vs top 5%
metrichimleague avgtop 5%pctl
Pass %85.6083.2990.1260%
Progressive/906.003.096.9187%
Line-breaks/902.041.152.5481%
xT/901.090.871.7171%
xA/900.030.060.1117%
Dribble %30.0043.8865.5917%
Def actions/90 (padj)16.2312.1616.6692%
Recoveries/90 (padj)5.363.865.5692%
Def height33.2837.7645.1813%
Duel win %28.5728.0849.5852%

Evidence-based evaluation

Same underlying data, read by Vision AI: several independent dimensions with the specific evidence behind each, not one number.

Defensive Value: average (46/100 vs role peers), driven by tackles/90 (below peer average, 17th percentile). Duels lost/90 is well controlled (92nd percentile).
Possession Value: solid (64/100 vs role peers), driven by times dispossessed/90 (well above peer average, 100th percentile). Bad touches/90 is well controlled (100th percentile).
Progression Value: strong (77/100 vs role peers), driven by progressive passes/90 (well above peer average, 86th percentile).
Risk Discipline: strong (72/100 vs role peers), driven by times dispossessed/90 (well above peer average, 100th percentile). Offsides/90 is well controlled (100th percentile).
Decision Quality: solid (69/100 vs role peers), driven by pass completion vs difficulty-adjusted expectation (pts) (above peer average, 69th percentile).
42%
avg opponent strength faced
25%
of matches vs top-third teams
Tactical fit (AC Milan): his Territory (wide vs central) (92) sits well above his own team's average (56, itself the 83% mark league-wide) — the single biggest gap between him and how AC Milan plays on the whole.
03

Where is he influential — vs where is he merely present?

Red fill = raw touch territory. Gold rings = zones where his influence (xT added, progression, line-breaks, key passes) outweighs how often he's actually there — one combined map instead of two separate maps to compare by eye. Red with no ring: present but not dangerous. A ring on faint red: rare touches, outsized impact.

own goal left, attacking →
36
passes / match
14.9
def actions / 90
4–61
pass range (matches)
18
clearances
Pass range = his fewest and most passes in any single match this season (4 at the low end, 61 at the high) — a measure of match-to-match involvement, not pass distance.
In possession

In possession

What he does with the ball: build-up, progression, creation, carrying and finishing.

13

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

38 tracked carries (8.3/90, 6 progressive, 303m total) — the ball moving with his touches, a different signal from dribbles below (beating an opponent 1v1). even a player who rarely dribbles past a man can still carry the ball forward constantly in build-up; this is that.

3%3%3%32%26%26%5%3%
progressivelateral/short% of his 38 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 6m, longest 22m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
2Outside → Inside
5Inside → Inside
27Outside → Outside
4Inside → Outside
First (26)Second (10)Third (2)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →

Beaten in the tackle

How often an attacker gets past him in a 1v1 defensive duel — the closest signal the data has to "dribbled past" (no attacker-beat-defender field exists directly, so this counts tackles he attempted and lost).

9
tackle duels
6
won
3
beaten · 33%
brighter band = more tackle duels · own goal left, attacking →
INSIDE 67%
OUTSIDE 33%
Tackle-duel location — 6 inside · 3 outside
Right Wing
0 · 0%
Right Half-Space
2 · 22%
Central
1 · 11%
Left Half-Space
3 · 33%
Left Wing
3 · 33%
Vision AI beaten in 3 of 9 tackle duels (33% loss rate) — a solid 1v1 defensive record.
Every tackle duel, exact location
wonlost — dribbled pastown goal left, attacking →

He attempted only 1 dribble of his own all season — dribbling is not part of this role; his ball-carrying is covered above, his defending against the dribble below.

05

How does he build & move the ball?

How does he escape the first line?

8%
vertical passes
11×
1%
switches
1×
16%
carries
23×
76%
short circulation
108×
Answer: he escapes the press primarily through carrying — stepping out with the ball.

How he moves the ball — his 4 busiest progression routes, not where every pass starts and ends separately. Arrow width = how often, colour = xT gained, dashed = switch of play. The full breakdown is in the lane matrix below.

own goal left, attacking →
Lane transition matrix — when he receives in a lane, where does it go?
TO →RWRHSCLHSLWRW3100%3RHS2100%2C617%150%333%2LHS2536%952%1312%3LW2199%1942%9249%108FROM
Rows normalised: each row sums to 100% of that lane's completed passes. Grey number = passes from that lane.

Primary route: the left wing in the middle third → the left half-space in the middle third — 8 progressive passes (29% of his progression) at 0.008 xT each. He moves it inside.

His progression is inward: 64% of progressive passes move the ball toward the middle versus 0% going wider — he cuts in rather than holding width.

Only 3% of his passes switch play, so his threat is same-side — contain the flank he occupies and the route closes.

Quality behind the volume: 5 line-breaking passes and 7 final-third entries, 2.4 total xT added.

Origin and destination are measured on the same event row — no receiver inference. Receiver identity is not recoverable from this data source.
All passes — origin zone share
Filter: from to
0%0%0%0%1%0%0%2%1%1%5%18%30%22%14%4%
completedincomplete288 passes · any zone → any zone · own goal left, attacking →
288
passes
89%
completed
33
lost
Vision AIIn line with his 89% season completion rate.
06

How does he progress play?

How much he drives the ball forward. Progressive = completed pass advancing ≥15 toward goal.

16
progressive · 3.5/90
7
final-third entries · 1.5/90
1
box entries · 0.22/90
19
progression index /90
Progression index: one composite number — progressive passes + progressive carries + 2% of total distance progressed + 8× positive xT added, all per 90. Weights VOLUME and THREAT together rather than counting progressive actions alone.
10

How does he create chances?

3 key passes (0.66/90), 0 of them assists — where his chance creation specifically comes from, 18 zones (6×3), showing his share of key passes originating there.

Chance creation — key pass origin zone share
Filter:
33%67%
chance creation (3)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
07

Where does he become vulnerable?

33 times he gave the ball away. For a defender the danger is where — a loss in his own third can turn into a chance against; higher up it costs little.

6
attacking third (cheap)
17
middle third
10
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 18% of losses are in the attacking third — a notable share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Mistake danger (proxy): 2.98 danger-index/90 · 0.412 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
08

What is his passing profile?

288
passes attempted
34%
mostly sideways
54%
mostly short
Direction
Forward
93 · 32%
Sideways
98 · 34%
Backward
97 · 34%
Length (completed)
Short (<15m)
138 · 54%
Medium
110 · 43%
Long (>30m)
7 · 3%
09

Preferred Progression Routes — xT-weighted

His progressive passes as zone→zone routes, weighted by expected threat (xT) added — arrow width and the number are the total xT generated on each route, not just how often he plays it. This is where he actually moves the needle.

0.270.230.230.200.160.15
own goal left, attacking →
Highest-value routes (xT)
0.27
Left Wing Mid third → Left Wing Mid third
4 passes
0.23
Left Wing Mid third → Left Half-Space Mid third
2 passes
0.23
Left Wing Att third → Left Wing Att third
2 passes
0.20
Left Half-Space Att third → Left Half-Space Att third
1 passes
0.16
Left Wing Def third → Left Wing Mid third
2 passes
0.15
Central Att third → Left Wing Att third
1 passes
11

Where Does He Receive?

The zones where Pervis Estupiñán gets on the ball — his top three ball-collection areas highlighted (gold = primary). Reception is proxied by where his on-ball actions begin (no explicit receiver is recorded).

123
1 = primary, 2 = secondary, 3 = third · own goal left, attacking →
His collection zones
47%
Primary
Left Wing, Middle third
21%
Secondary
Left Wing, Defensive third
16%
Third
Left Wing, Attacking third
These are the zones where he collected the ball most.
12

Where Does He Operate? — Every Zone

Every on-ball touch (pass, dribble, shot) binned into a 6×3 grid — raw counts of where Pervis Estupiñán actually gets on the ball. Hover any zone for its breakdown by action type, its share of all touches, and the exact coordinate range it covers.

Filter:
14538764411311634211112
own goal left, attacking → · brighter + higher number = more touches

Passes only — completed vs incomplete, by zone

Same zone grid, restricted to passes so completed/incomplete and match filters actually mean something — a shot or a dribble has no "completed" in the pass sense.

0%0%0%0%1%0%0%2%1%1%5%18%30%22%14%4%
own goal left, attacking →
14

Every Pass This Season — completed vs incomplete

Every pass this season, plotted individually — green = completed, grey (dashed) = incomplete, gold = key pass. Filter by outcome or isolate one match below.

3Key pass
2Cross
1Cutback
16Progressive
23Long ball
4Switch
By zone — where the pass started → where it landed
114Outside → Inside
28Inside → Inside
108Outside → Outside
5Inside → Outside
By direction
93Forward
97Backward
98Sideways
own goal left, attacking →
04

Tactical patterns — how his football actually looks

Three clustered sequence diagrams from his own event data — his three busiest routes: the way he progresses, the pattern behind his chances, and where a turnover turns dangerous.

own goal left, attacking →
How does he progress the ball forward?
His most common route for progressing play: he plays straight through the left wing in the middle third — 4 passes worth 0.27 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 3 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays inside from the left wing toward the central in the final third — 2 times. The receiver isn't identifiable in this data, only where the pass started and ended.
Where does he lose the ball most?
This is a RATE, not a raw count — the share of his touches in each zone that end in a turnover, so a zone he simply plays in more often doesn't automatically look riskier. His weakest zone is the left half-space in the middle third: 21% of his 19 touches there are lost (4 times).
—2 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—2 touches · too few—4 touches · too few16%10/62 lost—0 touches · too few—2 touches · too few—5 touches · too few21%4/19 lost7%10/137 lost—2 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—2 touches · too few—7 touches · too few9%4/44 lostRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

15

How & where does he defend?

68 defensive actions across the season (14.9/90). Where he wins the ball, and how — the core question for a defender. Aerial duels are not recorded for this competition, so aerial dominance is not measured here.

click a card to isolate that action type · own goal left, attacking →
9
tackles · 67% won
8
interceptions · 1.8/90
14
recoveries · 3.1/90
18
clearances · 4.0/90
4
blocks
32
avg action height
6
won high (att 3rd)
19
middle third
43
own third
Vision AI A deep-defending defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 31 proactive ball-wins (6.8/90), tackle success 67%. He defends mostly around the middle third.
16

Can he play under pressure?

Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Can Pervis Estupiñán still play out when the opponent presses high? His build-up quality split by press intensity — the key question for a ball-playing defender. Tiers of ~2-4 matches — directional evidence, not proof.

press tier
completion
prog /90
line-breaks /90
xT /90
High press (PPDA 4.4, 2m)
82%
5.3
4.4
1.11
Mid press (PPDA 6.4, 2m)
88%
1.5
6.6
1.08
Low press (PPDA 8.8, 4m)
92%
3.9
4.4
1.20
Team

Team context

How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.

17

Impact on the Team

AC Milan's output per match with Pervis Estupiñán (8 matches) versus without him (1 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 1 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. What his own defending should move — goals conceded and results — leads; attacking output (largely out of a defender's hands) is shown after, for context. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.

WITH (8)
WITHOUT (1)
Δ
goals against /match
1.38
0.00
+1.38
points /match
1.88
3.00
-1.12
goals for /match
2.00
2.00
+0.00
xG for /match
1.53
2.81
-1.28
18

His Share of the Team

Of everything AC Milan produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Pervis Estupiñán specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.

category
share
him / team
interceptions
5%
19 / 411
progressive passes
4%
103 / 2632
box entries
3%
25 / 724
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

19

Playing-Style Profile

Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 260 defensive mids in the pool (min 450 min). This is what separates players who post similar numbers but play differently. Proxy dimensions are inferred from on-ball data; true off-ball running / under-pressure context is not measured.

Deep-lying playmaker63%Tempo controller57%Ball-winning 636%
Why Deep-lying playmaker 63%: a weighted blend of progression 82 (weight 30%) + build-up 65 (weight 30%) + retention 51 (weight 20%) + press resistance 36 (weight 20%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
territory (wide vs central), crossing, line-breaking, through-balls
Strong
progression, receiving zones
Average
build-up, final-third threat, box threat, carrying, retention, creativity, transition, ball-winning
Weak
press resistance, dribbling, defensive aggression, passing directness
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Territory (wide vs central)
94
Crossing
91
Line-breaking
86
Through-balls ~proxy
86
Progression
82
Receiving zones
72
Build-up
65
Final-third threat
59
Box threat
59
Carrying
56
Retention
51
Creativity
50
Transition ~proxy
48
Ball-winning
42
Press resistance ~proxy
36
Dribbling
23
Defensive aggression
21
Passing directness
6
20

Similar Players — in style space

Closest comparables measured on the style scores above, within the same position family — so it separates how players are alike, not just how much they touch the ball. Each line explains the shared strength and the divergent mechanism. A light physical-profile term (height / weight; this player: 175 cm / 73 kg) is included at a quarter of one style axis's weight — enough to break ties between stylistic twins, not to override style. Scope: pooled across the Serie A, Bundesliga, La Liga, Ligue 1 and Premier League, percentiled within each player's own league before comparing — a match from another league is marked with its league name.

Style, not quality: a high match here means two players tend to produce the ball in similar ways — it is not a ranking, a scouting recommendation, or a claim that they are equally good.

Przemyslaw Frankowski Rennes · Ligue 1 · 175 cm / 70 kg
75%
Driven by: crossing (13%), territory (wide vs central) (13%), progression (13%). Different mechanism — Estupiñán more via build-up, retention; Frankowski more via creativity, final-third threat.
Carlos Augusto Inter · 184 cm / 78 kg
74%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (17%), passing directness (15%), crossing (14%). Different mechanism — Estupiñán more via line-breaking, crossing; Augusto more via box threat, carrying.
Matthieu Udol Lens · Ligue 1 · 178 cm / 79 kg
72%
Driven by: crossing (19%), territory (wide vs central) (15%), progression (11%). Different mechanism — Estupiñán more via build-up, retention; Udol more via box threat, passing directness.
Arthur Werder Bremen · Bundesliga · 173 cm / 70 kg
72%
Driven by: passing directness (17%), territory (wide vs central) (14%), defensive aggression (14%). Different mechanism — Estupiñán more via build-up, crossing; Arthur more via dribbling, carrying.
Arkadiusz Pyrka St. Pauli · Bundesliga 25/26 · 177 cm / 72 kg
72%
Driven by: defensive aggression (19%), territory (wide vs central) (17%), crossing (16%). Different mechanism — Estupiñán more via build-up, retention; Pyrka more via passing directness, dribbling.
Santi Comesaña Villarreal · La Liga · 188 cm / 75 kg
71%
Driven by: crossing (25%), line-breaking (13%), progression (11%). Different mechanism — Estupiñán more via territory (wide vs central), build-up; Comesaña more via passing directness, box threat.
21

Summary

Pervis Estupiñán is a deep-lying playmaker / tempo controller: 89% completion, 23 line-breaks and 3.5 progressive passes /90, resisting pressure with 100% dribble success. A central controller. [Off-ball screening position and scanning need tracking data.]

Based on 8 matches (410 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a deep-lying playmaker / tempo controller — best used in a system built around that identity. His biggest room for growth is press resistance — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall deep-lying playmaker profile.
✨ This report is interactive

Click any stat card to filter its map, hover a dot for the exact match, and use the dropdowns to slice passes zone-to-zone. Nothing here is static.

Vision AI · building report