العربيةSeason20262026 · this seasonAll seasons
Building the full report
Combining every season — this one is larger, give it a moment.
Vision AI ← BACK TO SEARCH
Player reportSerie A 2026

Rafa Obrador

Sassuolo
Central midfielder CM
balanced central profile
central middeep-lying playmakerprogressionbox-to-box
138
minutes
4 apps
10
progressive passes
6.5/90
84%
pass completion
90 passes
0
key passes
0.00/90
1
box entries
0.65/90
5
final-3rd entries
3.3/90
6
dribbles
33% won
18
possessions lost
3.89 danger/90
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

Thin sample this season. Rafa Obrador has played 4 matches (138 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
Left Wing, Middle third — mostly in the middle third (47% of his 90 passes)
84% completion · 90× in 4/4 matches
↓
PROGRESS
drive or pass into the final third
6.5 prog/90 · 10× in 3/4 matches
Signature: Receive → Progress — the only steps proven repeatable this season (2 of 4 in the full pattern). Not enough evidence yet for the rest of the chain below.
Not a pattern: arrive — 1× (low confidence, shown as a number only, no tactical conclusion drawn); create / finish — 0× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet) — omitted from the signature rather than presented as one.
In possession

In possession

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

04

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

21 tracked carries (13.7/90, 7 progressive, 242m 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.

5%29%19%24%14%10%
progressivelateral/short% of his 21 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 11m, longest 27m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
3Outside → Inside
1Inside → Inside
15Outside → Outside
2Inside → Outside
First (21)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?

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
05

Where does he become vulnerable?

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

8
attacking third (cheap)
6
middle third
4
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 44% of losses are in the attacking third — a notable share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Mistake danger (proxy): 3.89 danger-index/90 · 0.331 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
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 →
How does he progress the ball forward?
His most common route for progressing play: he plays inside from the left wing toward the left hs in the final third — 1 passes worth 0.31 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 final third: 22% of his 23 touches there are lost (5 times).
—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—3 touches · too few16%3/19 lost—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few12%1/8 lost9%3/34 lost—0 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—0 touches · too few—2 touches · too few22%5/23 lostRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

06

How & where does he defend?

22 defensive actions across the season (14.3/90). 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 →
4
tackles · 50% won
1
interceptions · 0.7/90
6
recoveries · 3.9/90
5
clearances · 3.3/90
2
blocks
32
avg action height
1
won high (att 3rd)
7
middle third
14
own third
Vision AI A deep-defending defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 11 proactive ball-wins (7.2/90), tackle success 50%. He defends mostly around the middle third.
Team

Team context

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

07

Impact on the Team

Sassuolo's output per match with Rafa Obrador (4 matches) versus without him (5 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 5 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.

WITH (4)
WITHOUT (5)
Δ
goals for /match
1.50
1.60
-0.10
xG for /match
1.21
1.23
-0.03
goals against /match
2.25
2.60
-0.35
points /match
1.00
0.80
+0.20
08

His Share of the Team

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

category
share
him / team
successful take-ons
4%
11 / 259
tackles
4%
27 / 641
progressive passes
4%
76 / 1958
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

09

Playing-Style Profile

Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 383 central 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.

Deep-lying playmaker44%Tempo controller38%Advanced playmaker (8)38%Box-to-box runner34%
Why Deep-lying playmaker 44%: a weighted blend of progression 59 (weight 30%) + build-up 51 (weight 30%) + press resistance 37 (weight 20%) + retention 31 (weight 20%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
territory (wide vs central)
Strong
through-balls
Average
crossing, carrying, progression, ball-winning, dribbling, build-up, line-breaking, creativity
Weak
press resistance, final-third threat, retention, defensive aggression, transition, receiving zones, box threat, passing directness
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Territory (wide vs central)
99
Through-balls ~proxy
70
Crossing
65
Carrying
63
Progression
59
Ball-winning
53
Dribbling
51
Build-up
51
Line-breaking
47
Creativity
45
Press resistance ~proxy
37
Final-third threat
33
Retention
31
Defensive aggression
30
Transition ~proxy
27
Receiving zones
21
Box threat
18
Passing directness
3
10

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: 181 cm / 72 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 Serie A, Bundesliga, La Liga, Ligue 1 and Premier League, 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.

Daniel Svensson Borussia Dortmund · Bundesliga · 183 cm / 72 kg
80%
Driven by: passing directness (27%), territory (wide vs central) (23%), transition (15%). Different mechanism — Obrador more via carrying; Svensson more via retention, receiving zones.
Alessandro Zanoli Udinese · 188 cm / 74 kg
79%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (21%), box threat (16%), passing directness (15%). Different mechanism — Obrador more via carrying; Zanoli more via dribbling, press resistance.
Arsène Kouassi Lorient · Ligue 1 · 178 cm
77%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (20%), passing directness (20%), defensive aggression (16%). Different mechanism — Obrador more via defensive aggression, ball-winning; Kouassi more via dribbling, press resistance.
Lorenzo Bernasconi Atalanta · 190 cm / 72 kg
75%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (19%), passing directness (15%), defensive aggression (14%). Different mechanism — Obrador more via dribbling; Bernasconi more via final-third threat, line-breaking.
Domagoj Bradaric Hellas Verona 25/26 · 178 cm / 69 kg
70%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (16%), passing directness (16%), defensive aggression (12%). Different mechanism — Obrador more via carrying, build-up.
Jackson Tchatchoua Wolves · Premier League 25/26 · 186 cm / 76 kg
70%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (18%), box threat (15%), receiving zones (11%). Different mechanism — Obrador more via dribbling, build-up; Tchatchoua more via passing directness.
11

Summary

Rafa Obrador is a deep-lying playmaker: 6.5 progressive passes, 0.00 key passes /90, 1 box entries, 0 goals from 0.00 xG. A box-to-box contributor across every phase.

Based on 4 matches (138 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a deep-lying playmaker — best used in a system built around that identity. His biggest room for growth is retention — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall deep-lying playmaker 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