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

Gvidas Gineitis

Torino
Half-space creator CM
39% of actions in the half-spaces
central midtransition runnerprogressionbox-to-box
408
minutes
8 apps
6
progressive passes
1.3/90
76%
pass completion
142 passes
5
key passes
1.10/90
1
box entries
0.22/90
16
final-3rd entries
3.5/90
5
dribbles
0% won
39
possessions lost
2.84 danger/90
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

Thin sample this season. Gvidas Gineitis has played 8 matches (408 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
Central, Middle third — mostly in the middle third (61% of his 142 passes)
76% completion · 142× in 8/8 matches
↓
PROGRESS
drive or pass into the final third
1.3 prog/90 · 6× in 5/8 matches
↓
CREATE / FINISH
cut-back or shot from inside
1.10 key passes /90 · 0 goals · 7× in 4/8 matches
Signature: Receive → Progress → Create / Finish — 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: arrive — 1× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet) — omitted from the signature rather than presented as one.
02

central mid radar — percentile vs his peers

hierarchical score 46/100

A position-aware radar: these 13 axes are the metrics that matter for a central mid. Each axis is his percentile among the 110 central mids in the league (min 450 min). (padj) = possession-adjusted: defensive volumes are scaled by how much defending his team actually does, so opportunity is not confused with ability.

Pass %14% · #95/110(72.37)Progressive/9026% · #81/110(2.82)Line-breaks/9020% · #88/110(0.93)xT/9030% · #77/110(0.72)xA/9070% · #33/110(0.09)Final-3rd/9037% · #69/110(3.34)Box deliveries/9063% · #41/110(1.69)Dribbles/9060% · #44/110(0.68)Dribble %67% · #36/110(42.50)Recoveries/90 (padj)34% · #73/110(3.65)Tackles/90 (padj)73% · #30/110(2.04)xG/9031% · #76/110(0.06)Duel win %88% · #13/110(34.48)
Radar read: elite for duel win % (88%), tackles/90 (padj) (73%), xa/90 (70%); weakest axes pass % (14%), line-breaks/90 (20%). Percentiles, not raw values — 50% = league-average central mid.
League distribution — every dot a central mid, dashed cross = league average, diamond = him
X Y
Full context table — him vs league average vs top 5%
metrichimleague avgtop 5%pctl
Pass %72.3780.9090.9514%
Progressive/902.823.938.3126%
Line-breaks/900.931.412.9620%
xT/900.720.971.7330%
xA/900.090.070.1570%
Final-3rd/903.343.917.5837%
Box deliveries/901.691.452.9963%
Dribbles/900.680.581.4160%
Dribble %42.5039.1358.5967%
Recoveries/90 (padj)3.654.086.0834%
Tackles/90 (padj)2.041.622.8773%
xG/900.060.080.2031%
Duel win %34.4820.3841.3388%

Evidence-based evaluation

Same underlying data, read by Vision AI: several independent dimensions with the specific evidence behind each, not one number.

Progression Value: weak (25/100 vs role peers), driven by line-breaking passes/90 (below peer average, 20th percentile).
Possession Value: average (48/100 vs role peers), driven by pass completion % (below peer average, 14th percentile). Times dispossessed/90 is well controlled (100th percentile).
Chance Creation: solid (60/100 vs role peers), driven by xA/90 (well above peer average, 70th percentile).
Defensive Value: strong (77/100 vs role peers), driven by tackles/90 (well above peer average, 86th percentile).
Decision Quality: weak (14/100 vs role peers), driven by pass completion vs difficulty-adjusted expectation (pts) (below peer average, 14th percentile).
Risk Discipline: strong (70/100 vs role peers), driven by times dispossessed/90 (well above peer average, 100th percentile). Offsides/90 is well controlled (100th percentile).
51%
avg opponent strength faced
38%
of matches vs top-third teams
Tactical fit (Torino): his Line-breaking (21) sits well below his own team's average (55, itself the 74% mark league-wide) — the single biggest gap between him and how Torino plays on the whole.
03

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 →
18
passes / match
1.2
dribbles / match
9–33
pass range (matches)
1–2
dribble range (matches)
Pass range = his fewest and most passes in any single match this season (9 at the low end, 33 at the high) — a measure of match-to-match involvement, not pass distance. Dribble range works the same way, for dribbles/carries per match.
In possession

In possession

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

09

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

40 tracked carries (8.8/90, 8 progressive, 400m 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%12%8%5%2%15%15%10%2%8%5%8%5%
progressivelateral/short% of his 40 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 8m, longest 36m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
3Outside → Inside
25Inside → Inside
10Outside → Outside
2Inside → Outside
First (15)Second (15)Third (10)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.

05

How does he create chances?

5 key passes (1.10/90), 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:
40%40%20%
chance creation (5)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
11

Where does he become vulnerable?

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

14
attacking third (cheap)
15
middle third
10
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 36% of losses are in the attacking third — a notable share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Mistake danger (proxy): 2.84 danger-index/90 · 0.330 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
07

Where Does He Receive?

The zones where Gvidas Gineitis 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).

123
1 = primary, 2 = secondary, 3 = third · own goal left, attacking →
His collection zones
27%
Primary
Central, Middle third
12%
Secondary
Right Half-Space, Middle third
8%
Third
Left Half-Space, Middle third
These are the zones where he collected the ball most.
08

Where Does He Operate? — Every Zone

Every on-ball touch (pass, dribble, shot) binned into a 6×3 grid — raw counts of where Gvidas Gineitis 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:
351110762131824931481861
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.

1%3%5%13%4%1%1%9%13%16%6%1%2%4%8%6%5%4%
own goal left, attacking →
12

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.

5Key pass
4Cross
6Progressive
18Long ball
6Switch
By zone — where the pass started → where it landed
12Outside → Inside
69Inside → Inside
7Outside → Outside
20Inside → Outside
By direction
59Forward
41Backward
42Sideways
own goal left, attacking →
04

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 wing, advancing it forward in the middle third — 3 passes worth 0.32 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 5 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays straight through the central, 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 left wing in the final third: 75% of his 8 touches there are lost (6 times).
—2 touches · too few—6 touches · too few27%3/11 lost—6 touches · too few—3 touches · too few30%3/10 lost0%0/17 lost8%3/38 lost33%4/12 lost22%2/9 lost—3 touches · too few—7 touches · too few—4 touches · too few—6 touches · too few75%6/8 lostRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
06

Does he carry inside or outside — his ball-carries across the pitch

Four arrows, one per movement class of his ball-carries: outside→inside (cutting in with the ball), inside→outside (carrying wide), outside→outside (down the touchline) and inside→inside (through the middle). Each count is measured from the carry's real start and end coordinates.

own goal left, attacking →
Across 40 ball-carries, his dominant tendency is that he carries through central areas (62%). He carries from outside into the middle 3 times and out toward the touchline 2 — a genuine inside forward who cuts in with the ball.
10

What happens right after he carries the ball

Every carry's end point matched against his own very next pass or shot in the same match, when one starts almost exactly there — the direct continuation of that touch, not a separate stat. “No clean link” means no pass or shot of his own started close enough to count (often the carry ended in a tackle or a loss); it isn't a claim about exactly what happened, only that nothing traceable followed.

Shot
2 · 5%
Progressive / key pass
0 · 0%
Simple pass
28 · 70%
No clean link
10 · 25%
Of 40 carries, 5% flow straight into a shot of his own, 0% into a key or progressive pass — a genuine end product to the carry, not just ball retention. 25% have no clean link to a next touch of his own close to where the carry ended.
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

14

How & where does he defend?

56 defensive actions across the season (12.4/90). 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 →
8
tackles · 75% won
0
interceptions · 0.0/90
18
recoveries · 4.0/90
5
clearances · 1.1/90
2
blocks
44
avg action height
7
won high (att 3rd)
32
middle third
17
own third
Vision AI A mid-block defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 26 proactive ball-wins (5.7/90), tackle success 75%. He defends high, stepping out to intercept — suits a high line.
13

Against Different Pressing Intensities

Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Does Gvidas Gineitis 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 3.9, 2m)
0.57
1.4
1.35
0%
Mid press (PPDA 4.7, 2m)
0.41
1.2
2.37
0%
Low press (PPDA 6.4, 4m)
0.33
1.4
0.45
0%
Team

Team context

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

15

Impact on the Team

Torino's output per match with Gvidas Gineitis (8 matches) versus without him (1 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 1 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.

WITH (8)
WITHOUT (1)
Δ
goals for /match
1.62
1.00
+0.62
xG for /match
1.06
0.77
+0.29
goals against /match
1.62
1.00
+0.62
points /match
1.50
1.00
+0.50
16

His Share of the Team

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

category
share
him / team
box entries
9%
42 / 449
tackles
8%
53 / 706
zone-14 entries
7%
19 / 276
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

17

Playing-Style Profile

Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 381 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.

Transition runner57%Box-to-box runner49%Advanced playmaker (8)42%Tempo controller29%
Why Transition runner 57%: a weighted blend of defensive aggression 80 (weight 30%) + transition 42 (weight 45%) + box threat 49 (weight 25%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
—
Strong
defensive aggression, ball-winning
Average
passing directness, dribbling, creativity, press resistance, box threat, receiving zones, crossing, final-third threat, territory (wide vs central), transition
Weak
build-up, carrying, retention, progression, through-balls, line-breaking
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Defensive aggression
80
Ball-winning
73
Passing directness
66
Dribbling
64
Creativity
56
Press resistance ~proxy
50
Box threat
49
Receiving zones
45
Crossing
44
Final-third threat
44
Territory (wide vs central)
44
Transition ~proxy
42
Build-up
33
Carrying
31
Retention
28
Progression
25
Through-balls ~proxy
23
Line-breaking
21
18

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 / 79 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.

Mohamed Kaba Lecce · 185 cm / 71 kg
87%
Driven by: defensive aggression (24%), ball-winning (17%), progression (11%). Different mechanism — Kaba more via passing directness, transition.
Idrissa Touré Pisa · 188 cm / 76 kg
76%
Driven by: defensive aggression (21%), build-up (13%), retention (13%). Different mechanism — Gineitis more via receiving zones, final-third threat; Touré more via territory (wide vs central), passing directness.
Joelinton Newcastle · Premier League · 186 cm / 81 kg
75%
Driven by: progression (16%), ball-winning (15%), defensive aggression (15%). Different mechanism — Joelinton more via retention, press resistance.
Diego Gómez Brighton · Premier League · 185 cm / 77 kg
72%
Driven by: defensive aggression (30%), ball-winning (17%), retention (11%). Different mechanism — Gineitis more via passing directness; Gómez more via box threat, line-breaking.
Youssef Maleh Lecce · 179 cm / 70 kg
70%
Driven by: defensive aggression (18%), carrying (14%), progression (13%). Different mechanism — Gineitis more via dribbling, receiving zones.
Mikel Merino Arsenal · Premier League · 189 cm / 83 kg
66%
Driven by: defensive aggression (26%), progression (14%), carrying (11%). Different mechanism — Gineitis more via creativity, crossing; Merino more via box threat, through-balls.
19

Summary

Gvidas Gineitis is a transition runner: 1.3 progressive passes, 1.10 key passes /90, 1 box entries, 0 goals from 0.22 xG. A box-to-box contributor across every phase.

Based on 8 matches (408 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a transition runner — best used in a system built around that identity. His biggest room for growth is transition — 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.

Vision AI · building report