Thin sample this season. Igor Jesus has played 5 matches (281 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.
Signature: Link → Finish → Convert — the only steps proven repeatable this season (3 of 4 in the full pattern). Not enough evidence yet for the rest of the chain below.
Not a pattern: receive / move — 2× (low confidence, shown as a number only, no tactical conclusion drawn) — 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.
23 tracked carries (7.4/90, 7 progressive, 212m 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 23 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 8m, longest 21m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
First (23)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.
03
How does he create chances?
2 key passes (0.64/90), 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 (2)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 (1)of 2 key passes landing in the final thirdattacking ↑ toward goal
04
Where does he become vulnerable?
21 possessions lost. Directness has a cost — the question is where. Attacking-third losses are cheap; deep ones are dangerous.
6
attacking third (cheap)
15
middle third
0
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 29% of losses are in the attacking third — a notable share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Mistake danger (proxy): 1.80 danger-index/90 · 0.268 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
02
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 it out from the central to the left hs, advancing it forward in the middle third — 2 passes worth 0.31 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 2 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays straight through the right hs, advancing it forward in the middle third — 1 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 middle third: 38% of his 8 touches there are lost (3 times).
64 defensive actions across the season (20.5/90). 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 →
2
tackles · 50% won
0
interceptions · 0.0/90
8
recoveries · 2.6/90
5
clearances · 1.6/90
1
blocks
52
avg action height
22
won high (att 3rd)
25
middle third
17
own third
Vision AI A front-foot / high defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 10 proactive ball-wins (3.2/90), tackle success 50%. 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.
36
attacking-half actions · 11.53/90
Team
Team context
How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.
Nottingham Forest's output per match with Igor Jesus (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
0.80
0.67
+0.13
xG for /match
1.56
0.00
+1.56
goals against /match
1.00
1.67
-0.67
points /match
1.00
0.33
+0.67
08
His Share of the Team
Of everything Nottingham Forest produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Igor Jesus specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.
category
share
him / team
expected goals (xG)
16%
9.2 / 58.4
shots
13%
79 / 615
expected assists (xA)
6%
2.1 / 38.0
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 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.
Why Transition runner 69%: a weighted blend of transition 70 (weight 45%) + defensive aggression 65 (weight 30%) + box threat 51 (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
Territory (wide vs central)
75
Transition ~proxy
70
Passing directness
69
Build-up
67
Crossing
67
Defensive aggression
65
Final-third threat
60
Progression
60
Carrying
59
Creativity
56
Retention
53
Ball-winning
53
Box threat
51
Through-balls ~proxy
51
Line-breaking
45
Receiving zones
37
Press resistance ~proxy
36
Dribbling
15
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: 180 cm / 73 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.
Kai Havertz Arsenal · 193 cm / 83 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
66%
Driven by: dribbling (32%), press resistance (17%), territory (wide vs central) (15%). Different mechanism — Jesus more via carrying, retention; Benedyczak more via territory (wide vs central), final-third threat.
Ibou Sané Metz · Ligue 1 25/26 · 179 cm / 71 kg
60%
Driven by: dribbling (25%), territory (wide vs central) (15%), transition (13%). Different mechanism — Jesus more via defensive aggression, box threat; Sané more via territory (wide vs central), carrying.
Shuto Machino Borussia Monchengladbach · Bundesliga · 185 cm / 81 kg
55%
Driven by: dribbling (33%), press resistance (19%), build-up (10%). Different mechanism — Jesus more via retention; Machino more via through-balls, line-breaking.
Vakoun Bayo Udinese · Serie A · 184 cm / 72 kg
54%
Driven by: dribbling (39%), defensive aggression (18%), press resistance (14%). Different mechanism — Jesus more via territory (wide vs central), carrying; Bayo more via through-balls, line-breaking.
Raúl Jiménez Fulham 25/26 · 188 cm / 76 kg
53%
Driven by: dribbling (26%), press resistance (14%), territory (wide vs central) (14%). Different mechanism — Jesus more via retention, creativity; Jiménez more via line-breaking, through-balls.
11
Summary
Igor Jesus is a transition runner / pressing forward: 1 goals from 1.80 xG (-0.80 vs expected), 9 shots, 2 box entries. Under-performing his chances. [Off-ball runs, aerials and hold-up under contact need tracking/aerial data.]
Based on 5 matches (281 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a transition runner / pressing forward — 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 transition runner 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.
← BACK TO SEARCH
