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
in the first line of build-up — mostly in the middle third (51% of his 148 passes)
78% completion · 148× in 7/7 matches
↓
BREAK A LINE
vertical pass past the opponent midfield
1.5 prog/90 · 25× in 7/7 matches
↓
SWITCH PLAY
diagonal to the far side
cross-field balls · 3× in 3/7 matches
↓
PROGRESS
entries into the final third
1.4/90 · 9× in 4/7 matches
Signature: Receive → Break A Line → Switch Play → 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: carry out — 2× (low confidence, shown as a number only, no tactical conclusion drawn) — omitted from the signature rather than presented as one.
13
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 →
21
passes / match
15.8
def actions / 90
12–32
pass range (matches)
45
clearances
Pass range = his fewest and most passes in any single match this season (12 at the low end, 32 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.
32 tracked carries (4.9/90, 9 progressive, 293m 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.
progressivelateral/short% of his 32 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 7m, longest 22m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
First (21)Second (11)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).
5
tackle duels
4
won
1
beaten · 20%
brighter band = more tackle duels · own goal left, attacking →
INSIDE 40%
OUTSIDE 60%
Tackle-duel location — 2 inside · 3 outside
Right Wing
0 · 0%
Right Half-Space
0 · 0%
Central
2 · 40%
Left Half-Space
0 · 0%
Left Wing
3 · 60%
Vision AI beaten in 1 of 5 tackle duels (20% 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.
08
How does he create chances?
0 key passes (0.00/90), 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:
chance creation (0)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
03
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)
11
middle third
16
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 18% of losses are in the attacking third — a notable share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Mistake danger (proxy): 2.44 danger-index/90 · 0.486 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
04
Where Does He Receive?
The zones where Ethan Pinnock 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).
1 = primary, 2 = secondary, 3 = third · own goal left, attacking →
His collection zones
20%
Primary
Left Half-Space, Middle third
19%
Secondary
Left Wing, Middle third
17%
Third
Left Wing, Defensive third
These are the zones where he collected the ball most.
05
Where Does He Operate? — Every Zone
Every on-ball touch (pass, dribble, shot) binned into a 6×3 grid — raw counts of where Ethan Pinnock 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:
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.
own goal left, attacking →
07
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.
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 inside from the left wing toward the central, advancing it forward in the middle third — 1 passes worth 0.23 xT.
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 wing in the defensive third: 32% of his 25 touches there are lost (8 times).
104 defensive actions across the season (15.8/90). 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 →
5
tackles · 80% won
8
interceptions · 1.2/90
10
recoveries · 1.5/90
45
clearances · 6.8/90
2
blocks
29
avg action height
11
won high (att 3rd)
24
middle third
69
own third
Vision AI A deep-defending defender. He wins the ball mainly by clearing and blocking — a reactive, protect-the-box profile. 23 proactive ball-wins (3.5/90), tackle success 80%. He defends deep, protecting his box — a last-line stopper.
10
Can he play under pressure?
Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Can Ethan Pinnock 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 ~2-3 matches — directional evidence, not proof.
press tier
completion
prog /90
line-breaks /90
xT /90
High press (PPDA 2.8, 2m)
74%
0.5
3.3
0.12
Mid press (PPDA 3.2, 2m)
79%
1.4
3.3
0.54
Low press (PPDA 5.3, 3m)
81%
2.6
4.7
0.55
Team
Team context
How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.
Coventry's output per match with Ethan Pinnock (7 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 (7)
WITHOUT (1)
Δ
goals against /match
1.71
3.00
-1.29
points /match
0.86
0.00
+0.86
goals for /match
0.86
0.00
+0.86
xG for /match
1.08
0.00
+1.08
12
His Share of the Team
Of everything Coventry produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Ethan Pinnock specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.
category
share
him / team
clearances
17%
72 / 420
interceptions
9%
13 / 137
tackles
6%
10 / 160
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 513 centre-backs 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.
Stopper centre-back32%Ball-playing centre-back18%
Why Stopper centre-back 32%: a weighted blend of defensive aggression 55 (weight 35%) + ball-winning 34 (weight 40%) + retention 24 (weight 15%) + transition 17 (weight 10%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Territory (wide vs central)
72
Defensive aggression
55
Crossing
45
Passing directness
45
Ball-winning
34
Press resistance ~proxy
33
Dribbling
33
Box threat
32
Creativity
32
Through-balls ~proxy
32
Build-up
31
Retention
24
Receiving zones
23
Final-third threat
19
Line-breaking
17
Transition ~proxy
17
Progression
11
Carrying
9
15
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: 194 cm / 79 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.
Arthur Chaves Augsburg · Bundesliga 25/26 · 188 cm / 80 kg
91%
Driven by: carrying (19%), transition (17%), progression (16%). Different mechanism — Pinnock more via territory (wide vs central); Chaves more via box threat.
Sebastiaan Bornauw Hamburg · Bundesliga · 191 cm / 81 kg
89%
Driven by: carrying (17%), transition (17%), progression (15%). Different mechanism — Pinnock more via defensive aggression; Bornauw more via crossing, through-balls.
Zeno Van den Bosch Union Berlin · Bundesliga · 191 cm / 78 kg
88%
Driven by: transition (16%), carrying (13%), progression (13%). Different mechanism — Pinnock more via crossing, territory (wide vs central).
Abdel Abqar Getafe · La Liga · 188 cm / 80 kg
87%
Driven by: carrying (15%), progression (13%), transition (12%). Different mechanism — Pinnock more via territory (wide vs central); Abqar more via ball-winning, line-breaking.
Rasmus Nicolaisen Toulouse · Ligue 1 · 191 cm / 81 kg
84%
Driven by: transition (16%), carrying (12%), receiving zones (11%). Different mechanism — Pinnock more via passing directness; Nicolaisen more via retention, progression.
Joe Worrall Burnley 25/26 · 193 cm / 64 kg
83%
Driven by: carrying (13%), progression (13%), transition (10%). Different mechanism — Pinnock more via territory (wide vs central), dribbling; Worrall more via passing directness.
16
Summary
Ethan Pinnock is a stopper centre-back: 78% pass completion, 25 line-breaking passes and 1.5 progressive passes /90. A build-and-progress centre-back whose value is in beating the first line with the pass, not in raw defensive volume. [Aerial duels, marking, line-height and 1v1 recovery need aerial-event + tracking data, absent here.]
Based on 7 matches (592 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a stopper centre-back — best used in a system built around that identity.
His biggest room for growth is transition — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall stopper centre-back 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.