العربيةSeason2025/262026 · 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

Santiago Castro

Roma
Complete forward ST
4.3 shots/90 with 0.57 key passes/90
strikertarget manbox threatfinishing
314
minutes
7 apps
1
goals
1.69 xG
1.7
xG
15 shots
15
shots
0.11 xG/shot
2
box entries
0.57/90
2
key passes
0.57/90
7
dribbles
43% won
84%
pass completion
76 passes
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

Thin sample this season. Santiago Castro has played 7 matches (314 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.

LINK
lay-off and combine
2 key passes · 84% completion · 76× in 7/7 matches
↓
FINISH
shoot from central zones
1.69 xG · 15× in 7/7 matches
↓
CONVERT
goals vs expected
1 goals (-0.7 vs xG) · 1× in 7/7 matches
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.

06

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

24 tracked carries (6.9/90, 1 progressive, 179m 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.

8%4%8%12%4%8%4%4%8%25%12%
progressivelateral/short% of his 24 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 7m, longest 18m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
3Outside → Inside
12Inside → Inside
7Outside → Outside
2Inside → Outside
First (15)Second (9)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →

Dribbles (1v1s)

Only 7 dribbles attempted this season — too little volume to map a location pattern.

04

How does he create chances?

2 key passes (0.57/90), 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:
50%50%
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
02

Can he finish?

15 shots · 1.69 xG · 1 goals (-0.69 vs xG). Mostly right-footed. Circle size = xG.

shots  15
on target  5
goals  1
xG  1.69
xG on target  0.68
xG / shot  0.113
Where he shoots from — click an area of the box
05

Where does he become vulnerable?

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

7
attacking third (cheap)
9
middle third
0
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 44% of losses are in the attacking third — a notable share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Mistake danger (proxy): 1.04 danger-index/90 · 0.226 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 2 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays straight through the central 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 half-space in the middle third: 22% of his 9 touches there are lost (2 times).
—1 touch · too few—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—1 touch · too few—5 touches · too few—4 touches · too few9%1/11 lost22%2/9 lost—5 touches · too few—5 touches · too few—6 touches · too few7%1/15 lost—6 touches · too few—7 touches · too fewRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

08

How & where does he defend?

44 defensive actions across the season (12.6/90). 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 · 0.3/90
7
recoveries · 2.0/90
2
clearances · 0.6/90
2
blocks
56
avg action height
14
won high (att 3rd)
26
middle third
4
own third
Vision AI A front-foot / high defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 12 proactive ball-wins (3.4/90), 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.

27
attacking-half actions · 7.74/90
07

Against Different Pressing Intensities

Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Does Santiago Castro keep producing when the game is tight and the press is high? Tiers of ~2-3 matches — directional evidence, not proof.

press tier
xT /90
prog /90
key P /90
dribble%
High press (PPDA 5.0, 2m)
0.20
1.4
0.68
33%
Mid press (PPDA 6.2, 2m)
0.35
0.0
0.00
0%
Low press (PPDA 8.6, 3m)
0.23
0.0
0.76
67%
Team

Team context

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

09

Impact on the Team

Roma's output per match with Santiago Castro (7 matches) versus without him (2 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 2 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.

WITH (7)
WITHOUT (2)
Δ
goals for /match
3.00
1.00
+2.00
xG for /match
2.22
1.18
+1.04
goals against /match
0.86
1.00
-0.14
points /match
2.71
1.00
+1.71
10

His Share of the Team

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

category
share
him / team
expected goals (xG)
11%
8.9 / 79.3
shots
10%
78 / 747
successful take-ons
6%
19 / 309
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

11

Playing-Style Profile

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.

Target man45%Poacher42%False 939%Transition runner22%
Why Target man 45%: a weighted blend of box threat 50 (weight 50%) + retention 73 (weight 20%) + final-third threat 24 (weight 30%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
—
Strong
retention
Average
press resistance, build-up, line-breaking, box threat, receiving zones, dribbling
Weak
through-balls, creativity, defensive aggression, ball-winning, progression, final-third threat, crossing, passing directness, carrying, transition, territory (wide vs central)
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Retention
73
Press resistance ~proxy
61
Build-up
53
Line-breaking
51
Box threat
50
Receiving zones
49
Dribbling
49
Through-balls ~proxy
39
Creativity
37
Defensive aggression
34
Ball-winning
32
Progression
27
Final-third threat
24
Crossing
23
Passing directness
23
Carrying
22
Transition ~proxy
18
Territory (wide vs central)
17
12

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: 178 cm / 86 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.

Bamba Dieng Lorient · Ligue 1 25/26 · 178 cm / 78 kg
80%
Driven by: crossing (15%), territory (wide vs central) (12%), transition (11%). Different mechanism — Castro more via line-breaking, receiving zones; Dieng more via box threat.
Emmanuel Emegha Strasbourg · Ligue 1 25/26 · 196 cm / 82 kg
76%
Driven by: transition (14%), defensive aggression (14%), final-third threat (10%). Different mechanism — Castro more via line-breaking, defensive aggression; Emegha more via box threat, crossing.
Patrik Schick Leverkusen · Bundesliga · 191 cm / 86 kg
75%
Driven by: transition (19%), defensive aggression (12%), territory (wide vs central) (9%). Different mechanism — Castro more via line-breaking, through-balls; Schick more via box threat, receiving zones.
Haris Tabakovic Borussia Monchengladbach · Bundesliga 25/26 · 196 cm / 90 kg
75%
Driven by: transition (18%), final-third threat (12%), carrying (11%). Different mechanism — Castro more via line-breaking, receiving zones.
Jonathan Burkardt Eintracht Frankfurt · Bundesliga · 181 cm / 76 kg
74%
Driven by: transition (17%), retention (14%), territory (wide vs central) (13%). Different mechanism — Burkardt more via crossing, box threat.
Mohamed Bamba Lorient · Ligue 1 25/26 · 185 cm / 75 kg
72%
Driven by: transition (21%), carrying (16%), passing directness (11%). Different mechanism — Castro more via through-balls, line-breaking; Bamba more via territory (wide vs central), crossing.
13

Summary

Santiago Castro is a target man: 1 goals from 1.69 xG (-0.69 vs expected), 15 shots, 2 box entries. Under-performing his chances. [Off-ball runs, aerials and hold-up under contact need tracking/aerial data.]

Based on 7 matches (314 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a target man — 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 target man 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