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
Left Wing, Attacking third — mostly in the attacking third (55% of his 89 passes)
Signature: receive wide left → beat the full-back → carry into the right-foot channel → deliver or shoot. Stop the 1v1 on the left and you starve the chain.
In possession
In possession
What he does with the ball: build-up, progression, creation, carrying and finishing.
31 tracked carries (9.9/90, 15 progressive, 419m 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.
progressivelateral/short% of his 31 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 10m, longest 30m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
First (28)Second (3)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →
Dribbles (1v1s)
Only 6 dribbles attempted this season — too little volume to map a location pattern.
02
How does he create chances?
7 key passes (2.23/90), 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 (6)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 (4)from the right (2)of 6 key passes landing in the final thirdattacking ↑ toward goal
08
Where does he become vulnerable?
35 possessions lost. Directness has a cost — the question is where. Attacking-third losses are cheap; deep ones are dangerous.
22
attacking third (cheap)
11
middle third
2
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 63% of losses are in the attacking third — he gambles where a turnover costs little.
Mistake danger (proxy): 2.22 danger-index/90 · 0.199 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
06
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 switches from the left hs to the right hs in the final third — 1 passes worth 0.25 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 7 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays inside from the left wing toward the central 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 left wing in the final third: 38% of his 34 touches there are lost (13 times).
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 31 ball-carries, his dominant tendency is that he drives along the touchline (68%). He carries from outside into the middle 4 times and out toward the touchline 1 — a genuine inside forward who cuts in with the ball.
07
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
1 · 3%
Progressive / key pass
3 · 10%
Simple pass
13 · 42%
No clean link
14 · 45%
Of 31 carries, 3% flow straight into a shot of his own, 10% into a key or progressive pass — a genuine end product to the carry, not just ball retention. 45% have no clean link to a next touch of his own close to where the carry ended.
04
Crosses & Cutbacks
2 crosses (0.64/90, 1 completed) and 4 cutbacks (1.28/90, 2 completed) — two separate wide-delivery patterns into the box, each its own map with a completed/failed filter. Neither is a tagged event, so both are inferred from pass geometry — the intended end point of a failed attempt is still real data (an interception doesn’t erase where the ball was aimed): a cross is a pass aimed into the box starting from a wide channel; a cutback starts almost on the byline but is squared back rather than driven forward, aimed centrally around the box. The completed-cross count was checked against this platform’s own real match-level cross totals and lands within about 1 cross of the true count.
Crosses — close-up on the final third
Cutbacks — close-up on the final third
completedfailed (dashed)close-up on the box — attacking ↑ toward goal
36 defensive actions across the season (11.5/90). 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 →
4
tackles · 75% won
2
interceptions · 0.6/90
18
recoveries · 5.7/90
3
clearances · 1.0/90
2
blocks
44
avg action height
7
won high (att 3rd)
17
middle third
12
own third
Vision AI A mid-block defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 24 proactive ball-wins (7.7/90), tackle success 75%. 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.
18
attacking-half actions · 5.74/90
Team
Team context
How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.
Hull City's output per match with Sorba Thomas (5 matches) versus without him (3 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 3 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.
WITH (5)
WITHOUT (3)
Δ
goals for /match
1.00
1.33
-0.33
xG for /match
1.02
0.55
+0.47
goals against /match
1.40
0.33
+1.07
points /match
0.60
2.33
-1.73
11
His Share of the Team
Of everything Hull City produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Sorba Thomas specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.
category
share
him / team
expected assists (xA)
8%
1.2 / 14.0
box entries
7%
11 / 162
half-space entries
3%
9 / 281
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 234 wingers in the pool (min 180 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.
Why Pressing forward 81%: a weighted blend of defensive aggression 66 (weight 45%) + ball-winning 75 (weight 30%) + transition 83 (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
Final-third threat
90
Transition ~proxy
83
Passing directness
80
Through-balls ~proxy
78
Crossing
76
Ball-winning
75
Progression
73
Defensive aggression
66
Line-breaking
65
Carrying
63
Creativity
53
Territory (wide vs central)
46
Box threat
36
Build-up
26
Receiving zones
21
Dribbling
21
Press resistance ~proxy
19
Retention
16
13
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 / 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.
Julian Ryerson Borussia Dortmund · Bundesliga · 183 cm / 86 kg
72%
Driven by: transition (18%), final-third threat (15%). Different mechanism — Thomas more via defensive aggression; Ryerson more via territory (wide vs central), build-up.
Bazoumana Touré Newcastle · 178 cm / 70 kg
71%
Driven by: transition (24%), defensive aggression (13%), final-third threat (13%). Different mechanism — Thomas more via through-balls, crossing; Touré more via dribbling, receiving zones.
Noa Lang Napoli · Serie A · 176 cm / 70 kg
68%
Driven by: press resistance (19%), retention (12%), dribbling (12%). Different mechanism — Thomas more via ball-winning, passing directness; Lang more via receiving zones.
Marius Broholm Lille · Ligue 1 25/26 · 176 cm
64%
Driven by: transition (19%), press resistance (16%), dribbling (12%). Different mechanism — Thomas more via through-balls, final-third threat; Broholm more via receiving zones, box threat.
Nicola Zalewski Atalanta · Serie A · 175 cm / 68 kg
62%
Driven by: transition (20%), final-third threat (14%), retention (11%). Different mechanism — Thomas more via defensive aggression; Zalewski more via receiving zones, build-up.
Konan N’Dri Lecce · Serie A · 174 cm / 73 kg
60%
Driven by: transition (21%), retention (16%), build-up (16%). Different mechanism — Thomas more via final-third threat, crossing; N’Dri more via receiving zones, carrying.
14
Summary
Sorba Thomas is a wide, outside-first left carrier: 67% of dribbles in the wing lane, 69% of passes from wide — but 41% land inside. 2.2 progressive passes and 2.23 key passes /90 plus 0 goals from 0.36 xG. A carry-and-deliver threat.
Based on 5 matches (282 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a pressing forward / transition runner — best used in a system built around that identity.
His biggest room for growth is defensive aggression — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall pressing forward 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.