Thin sample this season. Thórir Helgason has played 8 matches (180 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 (54% of his 54 passes)
70% completion · 54× in 8/8 matches
↓
CREATE / FINISH
cut-back or shot from inside
1.50 key passes /90 · 0 goals · 6× in 3/8 matches
Signature: Receive → Create / Finish — 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: progress — 2× (low confidence, shown as a number only, no tactical conclusion drawn); arrive — 1× (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.
3 key passes (1.50/90), 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
04
Where does he become vulnerable?
17 possessions lost. Directness has a cost — the question is where. Attacking-third losses are cheap; deep ones are dangerous.
9
attacking third (cheap)
7
middle third
1
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 53% of losses are in the attacking third — he gambles where a turnover costs little.
Mistake danger (proxy): 1.97 danger-index/90 · 0.231 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 →
Where do his chances come from?
Of 3 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays inside from the right wing toward the right hs in the final 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 left wing in the middle third: 31% of his 13 touches there are lost (4 times).
Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Does Thórir Helgason keep producing when the game is tight and the press is high? Tiers of ~2-4 matches — directional evidence, not proof.
press tier
xT /90
prog /90
key P /90
dribble%
High press (PPDA 3.6, 2m)
0.49
4.3
0.00
100%
Mid press (PPDA 4.1, 2m)
0.09
0.0
0.00
0%
Low press (PPDA 6.4, 4m)
0.75
0.0
2.43
100%
Team
Team context
How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.
Venezia's output per match with Thórir Helgason (8 matches) versus without him (30 matches). A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.
WITH (8)
WITHOUT (30)
Δ
goals for /match
0.38
0.83
-0.46
xG for /match
0.61
0.81
-0.20
goals against /match
1.62
1.23
+0.39
points /match
0.25
1.20
-0.95
07
His Share of the Team
Of everything Venezia produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Thórir Helgason specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.
category
share
him / team
zone-14 entries
3%
5 / 182
successful take-ons
2%
6 / 293
half-space entries
2%
14 / 826
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 433 central mids 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.
Tempo controller45%Deep-lying playmaker40%Advanced playmaker (8)38%Transition runner25%
Why Tempo controller 45%: a weighted blend of retention 52 (weight 35%) + press resistance 77 (weight 20%) + build-up 30 (weight 30%) + progression 23 (weight 15%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Dribbling
98
Receiving zones
82
Press resistance ~proxy
77
Creativity
60
Box threat
56
Crossing
55
Through-balls ~proxy
55
Retention
52
Defensive aggression
51
Line-breaking
43
Territory (wide vs central)
40
Ball-winning
30
Build-up
30
Passing directness
26
Progression
23
Carrying
23
Final-third threat
19
Transition ~proxy
10
09
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: 187 cm / 66 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.
Nikolas Nartey Stuttgart · Bundesliga · 187 cm / 82 kg
71%
Driven by: dribbling (22%), transition (20%), press resistance (20%). Different mechanism — Nartey more via final-third threat, retention.
Dro Fernández PSG · Ligue 1 · 182 cm / 68 kg
64%
Driven by: receiving zones (17%), transition (16%), press resistance (16%). Different mechanism — Helgason more via passing directness, dribbling; Fernández more via retention, ball-winning.
Luca Waldschmidt Koln · Bundesliga · 181 cm / 74 kg
64%
Driven by: transition (29%), ball-winning (20%), dribbling (9%). Different mechanism — Helgason more via dribbling, press resistance; Waldschmidt more via box threat, through-balls.
Regan Slater Hull City · Premier League · 173 cm / 65 kg
60%
Driven by: transition (25%), dribbling (15%), progression (12%). Different mechanism — Helgason more via receiving zones, through-balls.
Angel Gomes Marseille · Ligue 1 · 168 cm / 62 kg
59%
Driven by: transition (24%), ball-winning (14%), receiving zones (14%). Different mechanism — Helgason more via dribbling, territory (wide vs central); Gomes more via final-third threat, retention.
Rafik Belghali Torino · 178 cm / 68 kg
59%
Driven by: dribbling (32%), build-up (16%), transition (14%). Different mechanism — Helgason more via receiving zones, defensive aggression; Belghali more via territory (wide vs central), transition.
10
Summary
Thórir Helgason is a tempo controller: 1.0 progressive passes, 1.50 key passes /90, 1 box entries, 0 goals from 0.22 xG. A box-to-box contributor across every phase.
Based on 8 matches (180 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a tempo controller — best used in a system built around that identity.
His biggest room for growth is progression — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall tempo controller 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
