Thin sample this season. Ismaïla Sarr has played 2 matches (24 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
Right Half-Space, Attacking third — between the lines — mostly in the attacking third (50% of his 6 passes)
67% completion · 6× in 2/2 matches
Signature: Only Receive shows a proven, repeatable pattern this season — too little evidence yet (2 matches loaded) for a fuller signature chain.
Not a pattern: turn / beat man — 0× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet); create — 0× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet); finish — 0× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet) — omitted from the signature rather than presented as one.
Team
Team context
How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.
Crystal Palace's output per match with Ismaïla Sarr (2 matches) versus without him (6 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 6 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.
WITH (2)
WITHOUT (6)
Δ
goals for /match
1.50
1.00
+0.50
xG for /match
1.36
0.08
+1.28
goals against /match
0.50
3.00
-2.50
points /match
2.00
0.50
+1.50
03
His Share of the Team
Of everything Crystal Palace produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Ismaïla Sarr specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.
category
share
him / team
expected goals (xG)
16%
9.2 / 59.3
shots
9%
48 / 506
zone-14 entries
5%
17 / 336
Recruitment
Style and verdict
Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.
Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 247 attacking 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.
Advanced playmaker (8)20%Half-space creator19%
Why Advanced playmaker (8) 20%: a weighted blend of box threat 63 (weight 15%) + creativity 23 (weight 35%) + progression 16 (weight 25%) + final-third threat 13 (weight 25%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Passing directness
86
Box threat
63
Transition ~proxy
47
Defensive aggression
44
Build-up
43
Crossing
33
Ball-winning
25
Creativity
23
Receiving zones
22
Carrying
19
Line-breaking
17
Territory (wide vs central)
17
Progression
16
Through-balls ~proxy
14
Final-third threat
13
Retention
12
Press resistance ~proxy
10
Dribbling
9
05
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: 185 cm / 76 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 Premier League, Bundesliga, La Liga, Ligue 1 and Serie A, 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.
Jens Odgaard Bologna · Serie A · 188 cm / 83 kg
90%
Driven by: press resistance (10%), progression (10%), creativity (9%). Different mechanism — Odgaard more via retention.
Kevin Schade Brentford · 183 cm / 74 kg
87%
Driven by: press resistance (14%), retention (10%), dribbling (10%). Different mechanism — Schade more via territory (wide vs central), defensive aggression.
Iñaki Williams Athletic Club · La Liga · 186 cm / 81 kg
85%
Driven by: press resistance (15%), dribbling (11%), retention (11%). Different mechanism — Sarr more via build-up, passing directness; Williams more via territory (wide vs central).
Federico Chiesa Liverpool · 175 cm / 70 kg
83%
Driven by: press resistance (17%), dribbling (13%), retention (11%). Different mechanism — Sarr more via build-up, crossing; Chiesa more via territory (wide vs central), ball-winning.
Omri Gandelman Lecce · Serie A · 188 cm / 84 kg
83%
Driven by: press resistance (13%), dribbling (10%), retention (8%). Different mechanism — Sarr more via box threat, transition; Gandelman more via defensive aggression.
Brennan Johnson Everton · 186 cm / 73 kg
82%
Driven by: press resistance (15%), dribbling (10%), retention (10%). Different mechanism — Sarr more via box threat; Johnson more via territory (wide vs central), through-balls.
06
Summary
Ismaïla Sarr is an advanced playmaker (8): 0.00 key passes /90, 0.0 progressive passes, 0 goals from 0.00 xG. A between-the-lines creator. [Off-ball movement into pockets needs tracking.]
Based on 2 matches (24 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as an advanced playmaker (8) — best used in a system built around that identity.
His biggest room for growth is final-third threat — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall advanced playmaker (8) 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.
← BACK TO SEARCH
