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 reportLa Liga 2026

Rodrigo Mendoza

Atletico
Half-space creator CM
46% of actions in the half-spaces
central midtransition runnerprogressionbox-to-box
156
minutes
5 apps
6
progressive passes
3.5/90
83%
pass completion
77 passes
0
key passes
0.00/90
1
box entries
0.58/90
8
final-3rd entries
4.6/90
6
dribbles
33% won
17
possessions lost
2.40 danger/90
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

Thin sample this season. Rodrigo Mendoza has played 5 matches (156 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
Right Half-Space, Middle third — mostly in the middle third (55% of his 77 passes)
83% completion · 77× in 5/5 matches
↓
PROGRESS
drive or pass into the final third
3.5 prog/90 · 6× in 3/5 matches
↓
CREATE / FINISH
cut-back or shot from inside
0.00 key passes /90 · 0 goals · 6× in 0/5 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× (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.

04

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

24 tracked carries (13.8/90, 4 progressive, 182m 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.

4%12%12%4%4%8%12%17%4%8%12%
progressivelateral/short% of his 24 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 6m, longest 18m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
4Outside → Inside
16Inside → Inside
4Outside → Outside
First (14)Second (10)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?

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

8
attacking third (cheap)
8
middle third
1
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 47% of losses are in the attacking third — he gambles where a turnover costs little.
Mistake danger (proxy): 2.40 danger-index/90 · 0.244 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 straight through the right wing in the final third — 2 passes worth 0.22 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 right half-space in the final third: 38% of his 8 touches there are lost (3 times).
—5 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—1 touch · too few—0 touches · too few—2 touches · too few—5 touches · too few20%4/20 lost0%0/8 lost—7 touches · too few—2 touches · too few12%1/8 lost38%3/8 lost—5 touches · too few—3 touches · too few—2 touches · too fewRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

06

How & where does he defend?

25 defensive actions across the season (14.4/90). 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 →
4
tackles · 75% won
0
interceptions · 0.0/90
9
recoveries · 5.2/90
0
clearances · 0.0/90
1
blocks
54
avg action height
7
won high (att 3rd)
15
middle third
3
own third
Vision AI A front-foot / high defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 13 proactive ball-wins (7.5/90), tackle success 75%. He defends high, stepping out to intercept — suits a high line.
Team

Team context

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

07

Impact on the Team

Atletico's output per match with Rodrigo Mendoza (5 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 (5)
WITHOUT (5)
Δ
goals for /match
1.80
2.20
-0.40
xG for /match
1.17
1.60
-0.43
goals against /match
0.60
1.00
-0.40
points /match
2.60
2.40
+0.20
08

His Share of the Team

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

category
share
him / team
successful take-ons
6%
22 / 369
ball recoveries
4%
69 / 1927
final-third entries
3%
80 / 2419
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.

Transition runner60%Tempo controller54%Deep-lying playmaker50%Box-to-box runner45%
Why Transition runner 60%: a weighted blend of transition 53 (weight 45%) + box threat 73 (weight 25%) + defensive aggression 52 (weight 30%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
—
Strong
dribbling, box threat, carrying
Average
crossing, press resistance, receiving zones, retention, transition, defensive aggression, build-up, final-third threat, creativity
Weak
through-balls, progression, line-breaking, ball-winning, territory (wide vs central), passing directness
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Dribbling
77
Box threat
73
Carrying
73
Crossing
64
Press resistance ~proxy
63
Receiving zones
61
Retention
61
Transition ~proxy
53
Defensive aggression
52
Build-up
46
Final-third threat
43
Creativity
43
Through-balls ~proxy
40
Progression
39
Line-breaking
37
Ball-winning
29
Territory (wide vs central)
27
Passing directness
19
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: 182 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 La Liga, Bundesliga, Ligue 1, Premier League 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.

Alexis Claude-Maurice Augsburg · Bundesliga · 174 cm / 62 kg
78%
Driven by: passing directness (19%), dribbling (16%), box threat (15%). Different mechanism — Mendoza more via line-breaking, receiving zones; Claude-Maurice more via territory (wide vs central).
Fer López Wolves 25/26 · 188 cm / 76 kg
71%
Driven by: dribbling (20%), passing directness (18%), carrying (13%). Different mechanism — Mendoza more via defensive aggression; López more via through-balls.
Jean-Victor Makengo Lorient · Ligue 1 · 177 cm / 75 kg
71%
Driven by: ball-winning (19%), passing directness (18%), dribbling (14%). Different mechanism — Mendoza more via build-up, receiving zones; Makengo more via territory (wide vs central), through-balls.
Emile Smith Rowe Fulham · Premier League · 182 cm / 79 kg
70%
Driven by: passing directness (24%), box threat (13%), press resistance (10%). Different mechanism — Mendoza more via dribbling; Rowe more via territory (wide vs central), retention.
Luka Sucic Real Sociedad · 185 cm / 78 kg
69%
Driven by: ball-winning (24%), box threat (17%), passing directness (13%). Different mechanism — Mendoza more via receiving zones, crossing.
Yunus Musah AC Milan · Serie A · 178 cm / 71 kg
68%
Driven by: dribbling (20%), carrying (16%), press resistance (15%). Different mechanism — Mendoza more via box threat; Musah more via retention, build-up.
11

Summary

Rodrigo Mendoza is a transition runner: 3.5 progressive passes, 0.00 key passes /90, 1 box entries, 0 goals from 0.34 xG. A box-to-box contributor across every phase.

Based on 5 matches (156 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 defensive aggression — 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