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 reportPremier League 2026

Kai Havertz

Arsenal
Pressing forward ST
5.1 high defensive actions/90
Capability Analysis
Finishing29%vs 18 strikers
"Does he finish better than the quality of chance he gets?"
Goals above expected-0.91goals33%
Placement quality vs xG-1.23index44%
Shots on target18.011%
Box Threat35%vs 18 strikers
"Is he a genuine goal threat by shot volume and quality?"
xG /900.35xG44%
Shots /902.3144%
xGOT /900.27xGOT17%
Ball-Carrying43%vs 18 strikers
"Does he advance the ball himself when the pass isn't on?"
Progressive carries /902.3878%
Carry distance /9054.93m67%
Successful take-ons /900.296%
Take-on success28.57%22%
Aerial Threat0%vs 18 strikers
"Is he a genuine aerial outlet -- can he win headers, not just occupy space?"
Aerial duels won /900.00%
Aerial win rate: 0.0%
strikertarget manbox threatfinishing
622
minutes
8 apps
2
goals
1.54 xG
1.5
xG
14 shots
14
shots
0.11 xG/shot
6
box entries
0.87/90
5
key passes
0.72/90
5
dribbles
20% won
79%
pass completion
159 passes
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

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 / MOVE
occupy the box, drop or run channel — mostly in the attacking third (55% of his 159 passes)
0.87 box entries/90 · 6× in 5/8 matches
↓
LINK
lay-off and combine
5 key passes · 79% completion · 159× in 8/8 matches
↓
FINISH
shoot from central zones
1.54 xG · 14× in 7/8 matches
↓
CONVERT
goals vs expected
2 goals (+0.5 vs xG) · 2× in 7/8 matches
Signature: occupy / move → link → shoot → convert.
18

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 →
20
passes / match
1.2
dribbles / match
7–28
pass range (matches)
1–2
dribble range (matches)
Pass range = his fewest and most passes in any single match this season (7 at the low end, 28 at the high) — a measure of match-to-match involvement, not pass distance. Dribble range works the same way, for dribbles/carries per match.
In possession

In possession

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

10

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

30 tracked carries (4.3/90, 11 progressive, 300m total) — the ball moving with his touches, a different signal from dribbles below (beating an opponent 1v1). this counts every touch-carry, not just his dribble attempts below — a fuller picture of how much of his ball-carrying is control-and-move rather than beating a man.

3%13%13%13%10%3%7%3%3%10%7%10%3%
progressivelateral/short% of his 30 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 7m, longest 30m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
4Outside → Inside
13Inside → Inside
9Outside → Outside
4Inside → Outside
First (19)Second (11)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →

Dribbles (1v1s)

Only 5 dribbles attempted this season — too little volume to map a location pattern.

13

How does he build & move 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 →RWRHSCLHSLWRW4370%3026%115%2RHS3520%749%1723%86%23%1C1822%450%928%5LHS128%117%242%533%4LW1839%761%11FROM
Rows normalised: each row sums to 100% of that lane's completed passes. Grey number = passes from that lane.

Primary route: the right wing in the middle third → central areas in the middle third — 2 progressive passes (33% of his progression) at 0.050 xT each. He moves it inside.

His progression is inward: 50% of progressive passes move the ball toward the middle versus 0% going wider — he cuts in rather than holding width.

Only 2% of his passes switch play, so his threat is same-side — contain the flank he occupies and the route closes.

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
7%18%16%15%3%4%8%7%2%2%2%4%9%5%
completedincomplete159 passes · any zone → any zone · own goal left, attacking →
159
passes
79%
completed
33
lost
Vision AIIn line with his 79% season completion rate.
04

How does he create chances?

5 key passes (0.72/90), 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:
40%20%20%20%
chance creation (5)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
Box deliveries — key passes reaching the final third, by flank
from the left (1)from the right (4)of 5 key passes landing in the final thirdattacking ↑ toward goal
02

Can he finish?

14 shots · 1.54 xG · 2 goals (+0.46 vs xG). Mostly left-footed. Circle size = xG.

shots  14
on target  8
goals  2
xG  1.54
xG on target  1.74
xG / shot  0.110
Where he shoots from — click an area of the box
07

Where does he become vulnerable?

37 possessions lost. Directness has a cost — the question is where. Attacking-third losses are cheap; deep ones are dangerous.

20
attacking third (cheap)
16
middle third
1
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 54% of losses are in the attacking third — he gambles where a turnover costs little.
Mistake danger (proxy): 1.11 danger-index/90 · 0.207 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
11

What is his passing profile?

159
passes attempted
37%
mostly sideways
75%
mostly short
Direction
Forward
41 · 26%
Sideways
59 · 37%
Backward
59 · 37%
Length (completed)
Short (<15m)
95 · 75%
Medium
27 · 21%
Long (>30m)
4 · 3%
08

Where Does He Receive?

The zones where Kai Havertz 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
20%
Primary
Right Wing, Attacking third
15%
Secondary
Right Half-Space, Attacking third
13%
Third
Right Half-Space, Middle third
These are the zones where he collected the ball most.
09

Where Does He Operate? — Every Zone

Every on-ball touch (pass, dribble, shot) binned into a 6×3 grid — raw counts of where Kai Havertz 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:
3361494612131511282826
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.

7%18%16%15%3%4%8%7%2%2%2%4%9%5%
own goal left, attacking →
12

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.

5Key pass
3Cutback
2Progressive
4Long ball
2Switch
By zone — where the pass started → where it landed
20Outside → Inside
52Inside → Inside
41Outside → Outside
13Inside → Outside
By direction
41Forward
59Backward
59Sideways
own goal left, attacking →
03

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 →
Where do his chances come from?
Of 5 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays straight through the right hs in the final third — 3 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 central in the final third: 40% of his 10 touches there are lost (4 times).
—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—4 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—3 touches · too few29%6/21 lost24%5/21 lost31%4/13 lost—3 touches · too few—7 touches · too few7%2/30 lost17%4/23 lost40%4/10 lost31%4/13 lost18%2/11 lostRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
05

Does he carry inside or outside — his ball-carries across the pitch

Four arrows, one per movement class of his ball-carries: outside→inside (cutting in with the ball), inside→outside (carrying wide), outside→outside (down the touchline) and inside→inside (through the middle). Each count is measured from the carry's real start and end coordinates.

own goal left, attacking →
Across 30 ball-carries, his dominant tendency is that he carries through central areas (43%). He carries from outside into the middle 4 times and out toward the touchline 4 — balanced between cutting in and holding width.
06

What happens right after he carries the ball

Every carry's end point matched against his own very next pass or shot in the same match, when one starts almost exactly there — the direct continuation of that touch, not a separate stat. “No clean link” means no pass or shot of his own started close enough to count (often the carry ended in a tackle or a loss); it isn't a claim about exactly what happened, only that nothing traceable followed.

Shot
2 · 7%
Progressive / key pass
2 · 7%
Simple pass
23 · 77%
No clean link
3 · 10%
Of 30 carries, 7% flow straight into a shot of his own, 7% into a key or progressive pass — a genuine end product to the carry, not just ball retention. 10% have no clean link to a next touch of his own close to where the carry ended.
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

15

How & where does he defend?

81 defensive actions across the season (11.7/90). 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 →
1
tackles · 100% won
3
interceptions · 0.4/90
8
recoveries · 1.2/90
4
clearances · 0.6/90
5
blocks
62
avg action height
35
won high (att 3rd)
39
middle third
7
own third
Vision AI A front-foot / high defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 12 proactive ball-wins (1.7/90), tackle success 100%. He defends high, stepping out to intercept — suits a high line.

Defensive work in the attacking half

Ball-wins in the attacking half only (own half vs. attacking half, a simple 2-way split, not the usual thirds) — the clearest single signal of how much he presses and recovers the ball high up the pitch.

64
attacking-half actions · 9.26/90
14

Against Different Pressing Intensities

Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Does Kai Havertz keep producing when the game is tight and the press is high? Tiers of ~2-4 matches — directional evidence, not proof.

press tier
xT /90
prog /90
key P /90
dribble%
High press (PPDA 3.6, 2m)
0.48
0.5
1.56
50%
Mid press (PPDA 4.3, 2m)
0.50
0.6
0.56
0%
Low press (PPDA 7.5, 4m)
0.30
0.0
0.31
0%
Team

Team context

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

16

Impact on the Team

Insufficient sample: Kai Havertz played nearly every Arsenal match in the loaded data, so there is no meaningful "without him" comparison yet. This section fills in as more matches (and the rest of the season) are scraped.

17

His Share of the Team

Of everything Arsenal produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Kai Havertz specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.

category
share
him / team
goals
15%
2 / 13
expected goals (xG)
7%
4.9 / 73.3
shots
5%
32 / 631
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 299 strikers 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.

Target man71%Poacher66%Transition runner65%False 961%
Why Target man 71%: a weighted blend of box threat 59 (weight 50%) + final-third threat 90 (weight 30%) + retention 61 (weight 20%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
territory (wide vs central), final-third threat
Strong
progression, crossing, passing directness
Average
receiving zones, carrying, transition, retention, defensive aggression, line-breaking, box threat, build-up, ball-winning, creativity
Weak
through-balls, press resistance, dribbling
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Territory (wide vs central)
96
Final-third threat
90
Progression
79
Crossing
73
Passing directness
71
Receiving zones
70
Carrying
66
Transition ~proxy
62
Retention
61
Defensive aggression
60
Line-breaking
59
Box threat
59
Build-up
57
Ball-winning
50
Creativity
49
Through-balls ~proxy
37
Press resistance ~proxy
34
Dribbling
13
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: 193 cm / 83 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.

Igor Jesus Nottingham Forest · 180 cm / 73 kg
67%
Driven by: dribbling (28%), territory (wide vs central) (17%), crossing (9%). Different mechanism — Havertz more via receiving zones, final-third threat.
Adrian Benedyczak Parma Calcio 1913 · Serie A 25/26 · 191 cm / 78 kg
63%
Driven by: dribbling (24%), territory (wide vs central) (21%), final-third threat (15%). Different mechanism — Havertz more via carrying, receiving zones; Benedyczak more via through-balls, passing directness.
Duván Zapata Torino · Serie A · 189 cm / 88 kg
61%
Driven by: final-third threat (17%), dribbling (14%), progression (13%). Different mechanism — Havertz more via territory (wide vs central), receiving zones; Zapata more via through-balls, line-breaking.
Marius Bülter Koln · Bundesliga · 188 cm / 85 kg
61%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (23%), dribbling (18%), final-third threat (15%). Different mechanism — Havertz more via retention, receiving zones; Bülter more via through-balls.
Oliver Burke Union Berlin · Bundesliga · 188 cm / 74 kg
60%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (23%), progression (14%), crossing (12%). Different mechanism — Havertz more via passing directness, final-third threat; Burke more via through-balls, creativity.
Sebastiano Esposito Sassuolo · Serie A · 183 cm / 76 kg
58%
Driven by: final-third threat (20%), territory (wide vs central) (17%), progression (14%). Different mechanism — Havertz more via box threat, retention; Esposito more via through-balls, ball-winning.
21

Summary

Kai Havertz is a target man / poacher: 2 goals from 1.54 xG (+0.46 vs expected), 14 shots, 6 box entries. A clinical finisher. [Off-ball runs, aerials and hold-up under contact need tracking/aerial data.]

Based on 8 matches (622 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a target man / poacher — best used in a system built around that identity. His biggest room for growth is box threat — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall target man 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