Thin sample this season. Jeremie Frimpong has played 5 matches (217 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 Wing, Middle third — wide or inverted — mostly in the middle third (51% of his 124 passes)
82% completion · 124× in 5/5 matches
↓
PROGRESS
carry or combine up the flank
2.1 prog/90 · 5× in 2/5 matches
↓
DRIBBLE
beat his man up the line
20% won · 5× in 3/5 matches
↓
DEFEND
1v1 and cover on his side
32 def actions · lost 19% deep · 32× in 5/5 matches
Signature: Receive → Progress → Dribble → Defend — 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: deliver — 0× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet) — 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 →
25
passes / match
13.3
def actions / 90
2–55
pass range (matches)
7
clearances
Pass range = his fewest and most passes in any single match this season (2 at the low end, 55 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.
18 tracked carries (7.5/90, 8 progressive, 198m 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 18 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 9m, longest 31m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
First (18)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
2
won
3
beaten · 60%
brighter band = more tackle duels · own goal left, attacking →
INSIDE 40%
OUTSIDE 60%
Tackle-duel location — 2 inside · 3 outside
Right Wing
3 · 60%
Right Half-Space
2 · 40%
Central
0 · 0%
Left Half-Space
0 · 0%
Left Wing
0 · 0%
Vision AI beaten in 3 of 5 tackle duels (60% loss rate) — a solid 1v1 defensive record.
Every tackle duel, exact location
wonlost — dribbled pastown goal left, attacking →
He attempted only 5 dribbles of his own all season — dribbling is not part of this role; his ball-carrying is covered above, his defending against the dribble below.
04
How does he create chances?
7 key passes (2.90/90), 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 (7)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
08
Where does he become vulnerable?
26 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.
17
attacking third (cheap)
4
middle third
5
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 65% of losses are in the attacking third — he gambles where a turnover costs little.
Mistake danger (proxy): 2.92 danger-index/90 · 0.271 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
05
Where Does He Receive?
The zones where Jeremie Frimpong 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
39%
Primary
Right Wing, Middle third
24%
Secondary
Right Wing, Attacking third
14%
Third
Right Wing, Defensive third
These are the zones where he collected the ball most.
06
Where Does He Operate? — Every Zone
Every on-ball touch (pass, dribble, shot) binned into a 6×3 grid — raw counts of where Jeremie Frimpong 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 →
09
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 straight through the right wing, advancing it forward in the middle third — 1 passes worth 0.19 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 7 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays inside from the right 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 right half-space in the final third: 50% of his 10 touches there are lost (5 times).
03
Crosses & Cutbacks
1 crosses (0.41/90, 0 completed) and 5 cutbacks (2.07/90, 4 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
32 defensive actions across the season (13.3/90). 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 · 40% won
1
interceptions · 0.4/90
9
recoveries · 3.7/90
7
clearances · 2.9/90
2
blocks
39
avg action height
7
won high (att 3rd)
8
middle third
17
own third
Vision AI A mid-block defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 15 proactive ball-wins (6.2/90), tackle success 40%. He defends mostly around the middle third.
Team
Team context
How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.
Liverpool's output per match with Jeremie Frimpong (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. 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 (5)
WITHOUT (3)
Δ
goals against /match
1.60
0.00
+1.60
points /match
1.20
3.00
-1.80
goals for /match
1.20
1.67
-0.47
xG for /match
1.80
0.61
+1.19
12
His Share of the Team
Of everything Liverpool produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Jeremie Frimpong specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.
category
share
him / team
box entries
5%
34 / 662
successful take-ons
5%
19 / 398
expected assists (xA)
5%
1.1 / 22.6
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 233 full-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.
Overlapping full-back70%Inverted full-back43%
Why Overlapping full-back 70%: a weighted blend of crossing 72 (weight 30%) + transition 61 (weight 25%) + dribbling 76 (weight 20%) + final-third threat 54 (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
Carrying
92
Dribbling
76
Creativity
74
Receiving zones
74
Crossing
72
Box threat
71
Through-balls ~proxy
66
Territory (wide vs central)
66
Line-breaking
62
Transition ~proxy
61
Press resistance ~proxy
60
Defensive aggression
57
Progression
55
Retention
55
Final-third threat
54
Build-up
31
Ball-winning
28
Passing directness
4
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: 171 cm / 63 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.
Alejandro Balde Barcelona · La Liga · 177 cm / 76 kg
73%
Driven by: passing directness (22%), carrying (18%), crossing (11%). Different mechanism — Frimpong more via box threat; Balde more via retention, build-up.
Romain Perraud Lille · Ligue 1 · 173 cm / 68 kg
68%
Driven by: passing directness (23%), crossing (16%), carrying (15%). Different mechanism — Frimpong more via dribbling, creativity; Perraud more via territory (wide vs central), final-third threat.
Ian Maatsen Aston Villa · 178 cm / 57 kg
67%
Driven by: passing directness (22%), creativity (18%), carrying (17%). Different mechanism — Frimpong more via through-balls; Maatsen more via ball-winning.
Achraf Hakimi PSG · Ligue 1 · 181 cm / 73 kg
67%
Driven by: passing directness (18%), carrying (17%), crossing (11%). Different mechanism — Frimpong more via territory (wide vs central), dribbling; Hakimi more via progression, final-third threat.
João Cancelo Barcelona · La Liga · 182 cm / 74 kg
67%
Driven by: carrying (19%), crossing (14%), passing directness (14%). Different mechanism — Cancelo more via ball-winning, final-third threat.
Nuno Mendes PSG · Ligue 1 · 180 cm / 70 kg
65%
Driven by: carrying (16%), creativity (15%), box threat (10%). Different mechanism — Frimpong more via territory (wide vs central); Mendes more via final-third threat, progression.
16
Summary
Jeremie Frimpong is an overlapping full-back: 2.1 progressive passes and 0 box entries, delivering 7 key passes. Inverted full-back. [1v1 recovery pace and off-ball overlap timing need tracking.]
Based on 5 matches (217 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as an overlapping full-back — 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 overlapping full-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.