العربيةVision AI ← BACK TO SEARCH
Player reportLa Liga 2026

Enzo Bardeli

Levante
Half-space creator AM
35% of actions in the half-spaces
Capability Analysis
Chance Creation12%vs 25 attacking mids
"Does he create real chances for others?"
Expected assists /900.08xA31%
Through balls /900.00%
Threat added by passing /900.5xT8%
Box entries (pass) /901.188%
Box Threat1%vs 25 attacking mids
"Is he a genuine goal threat by shot volume and quality?"
xG /900.03xG0%
Shots /900.590%
xGOT /900.07xGOT4%
Ball-Carrying25%vs 25 attacking mids
"Does he advance the ball himself when the pass isn't on?"
Progressive carries /902.9415%
Carry distance /9072.33m12%
Successful take-ons /900.390%
Take-on success50.0%73%
attacking midhalf-space creatorcreationbetween the lines
459
minutes
7 apps
8
key passes
1.57/90
10
progressive passes
2.0/90
1
box entries
0.20/90
12
final-3rd entries
2.4/90
1
goals
0.15 xG
4
dribbles
50% won
76%
pass completion
160 passes
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

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 — between the lines — mostly in the middle third (59% of his 160 passes)
76% completion · 160× in 7/7 matches
↓
TURN / BEAT MAN
face forward in the pocket
50% won · 4× in 4/7 matches
↓
CREATE
through-ball, cut-back, key pass
1.57/90 · 8× in 4/7 matches
↓
FINISH
arrive and shoot from central zones
1 goals · 0.15 xG · 3× in 3/7 matches
Signature: receive between the lines → turn → create or finish.
17

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 →
23
passes / match
1.0
dribbles / match
9–31
pass range (matches)
1–1
dribble range (matches)
Pass range = his fewest and most passes in any single match this season (9 at the low end, 31 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.

07

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

35 tracked carries (6.9/90, 10 progressive, 369m 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.

14%11%6%3%14%9%3%17%20%3%
progressivelateral/short% of his 35 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 9m, longest 32m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
3Outside → Inside
16Inside → Inside
11Outside → Outside
5Inside → Outside
First (22)Second (13)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →

Dribbles (1v1s)

Only 4 dribbles attempted this season — too little volume to map a location pattern.

12

How does he build & move the ball?

How he moves the ball — his 4 busiest progression routes, not where every pass starts and ends separately. Arrow width = how often, colour = xT gained, dashed = switch of play. The full breakdown is in the lane matrix below.

own goal left, attacking →
Lane transition matrix — when he receives in a lane, where does it go?
TO →RWRHSCLHSLWRW2050%1040%810%2RHS1833%633%622%411%2C2421%521%529%725%64%1LHS284%129%87%261%17LW323%119%628%950%16FROM
Rows normalised: each row sums to 100% of that lane's completed passes. Grey number = passes from that lane.

Primary route: the left wing in the middle third → the left wing in the middle third — 2 progressive passes (13% of his progression) at 0.004 xT each. He keeps it in the same lane.

His progression is inward: 53% of progressive passes move the ball toward the middle versus 7% going wider — he cuts in rather than holding width.

Only 5% of his passes switch play, so his threat is same-side — contain the flank he occupies and the route closes.

Quality behind the volume: 4 line-breaking passes and 12 final-third entries, 0.1 total xT added.

Origin and destination are measured on the same event row — no receiver inference. Receiver identity is not recoverable from this data source.
All passes — origin zone share
Filter: from to
2%8%11%4%8%2%12%7%5%5%6%16%8%7%
completedincomplete160 passes · any zone → any zone · own goal left, attacking →
160
passes
76%
completed
38
lost
Vision AIIn line with his 76% season completion rate.
02

How does he create chances?

8 key passes (1.57/90), 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:
14%29%14%14%14%14%
chance creation (7)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 (4)from the right (3)of 7 key passes landing in the final thirdattacking ↑ toward goal
09

Where does he become vulnerable?

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

24
attacking third (cheap)
12
middle third
4
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 60% of losses are in the attacking third — he gambles where a turnover costs little.
Mistake danger (proxy): 1.58 danger-index/90 · 0.202 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
10

What is his passing profile?

160
passes attempted
41%
mostly sideways
54%
mostly short
Direction
Forward
41 · 26%
Sideways
65 · 41%
Backward
54 · 34%
Length (completed)
Short (<15m)
66 · 54%
Medium
51 · 42%
Long (>30m)
5 · 4%
05

Where Does He Receive?

The zones where Enzo Bardeli 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
13%
Primary
Central, Middle third
12%
Secondary
Left Wing, Middle third
12%
Third
Left Half-Space, Middle third
These are the zones where he collected the ball most.
06

Where Does He Operate? — Every Zone

Every on-ball touch (pass, dribble, shot) binned into a 6×3 grid — raw counts of where Enzo Bardeli 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:
89261411619119131217813
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.

2%8%11%4%8%2%12%7%5%5%6%16%8%7%
own goal left, attacking →
11

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.

8Key pass
1Cross
3Cutback
10Progressive
8Long ball
4Switch
By zone — where the pass started → where it landed
26Outside → Inside
41Inside → Inside
26Outside → Outside
29Inside → Outside
By direction
41Forward
54Backward
65Sideways
own goal left, attacking →
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 left wing, advancing it forward in the middle third — 2 passes worth 0.21 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 8 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays inside from the right wing toward the central in the final third — 2 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: 47% of his 17 touches there are lost (8 times).
—3 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—3 touches · too few—4 touches · too few—4 touches · too few25%3/12 lost20%4/20 lost14%3/22 lost10%2/20 lost0%0/20 lost44%7/16 lost—4 touches · too few—7 touches · too few12%1/8 lost47%8/17 lostRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
04

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 35 ball-carries, his dominant tendency is that he carries through central areas (46%). He carries from outside into the middle 3 times and out toward the touchline 5 — a width-holder who drives down the line.
08

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
0 · 0%
Progressive / key pass
6 · 17%
Simple pass
24 · 69%
No clean link
5 · 14%
Of 35 carries, 0% flow straight into a shot of his own, 17% into a key or progressive pass — a genuine end product to the carry, not just ball retention. 14% 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?

46 defensive actions across the season (9.0/90). 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 →
7
tackles · 71% won
5
interceptions · 1.0/90
13
recoveries · 2.5/90
1
clearances · 0.2/90
1
blocks
55
avg action height
18
won high (att 3rd)
17
middle third
11
own third
Vision AI A front-foot / high defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 25 proactive ball-wins (4.9/90), tackle success 71%. 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 · 5.29/90
13

Against Different Pressing Intensities

Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Does Enzo Bardeli 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 4.0, 2m)
0.87
3.1
2.35
50%
Mid press (PPDA 4.7, 2m)
0.44
1.3
2.00
100%
Low press (PPDA 6.1, 3m)
0.34
1.7
0.86
0%
Team

Team context

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

15

Impact on the Team

Levante's output per match with Enzo Bardeli (7 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 (7)
WITHOUT (3)
Δ
goals for /match
1.29
2.33
-1.05
xG for /match
1.01
0.65
+0.36
goals against /match
1.86
2.00
-0.14
points /match
0.86
1.33
-0.48
16

His Share of the Team

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

category
share
him / team
goals
8%
1 / 12
interceptions
1%
5 / 340
box entries
1%
6 / 467
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

18

Playing-Style Profile

Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 247 attacking 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.

Half-space creator22%Advanced playmaker (8)19%
Why Half-space creator 22%: a weighted blend of creativity 28 (weight 40%) + final-third threat 32 (weight 30%) + dribbling 38 (weight 15%) + box threat 5 (weight 15%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
—
Strong
—
Average
build-up, defensive aggression, retention, press resistance, ball-winning
Weak
dribbling, crossing, final-third threat, through-balls, territory (wide vs central), creativity, progression, carrying, transition, line-breaking, passing directness, receiving zones, box threat
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Build-up
68
Defensive aggression
67
Retention
61
Press resistance ~proxy
60
Ball-winning
52
Dribbling
38
Crossing
38
Final-third threat
32
Through-balls ~proxy
30
Territory (wide vs central)
29
Creativity
28
Progression
23
Carrying
16
Transition ~proxy
14
Line-breaking
14
Passing directness
14
Receiving zones
13
Box threat
5
19

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: 173 cm / 65 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.

Daizen Maeda Ipswich · Premier League · 173 cm / 67 kg
80%
Driven by: transition (17%), box threat (11%), receiving zones (8%). Different mechanism — Bardeli more via press resistance, crossing; Maeda more via defensive aggression.
Grady Diangana Elche · 180 cm / 73 kg
76%
Driven by: transition (18%), box threat (12%), line-breaking (11%). Different mechanism — Bardeli more via through-balls, ball-winning; Diangana more via passing directness, receiving zones.
Gabriele Piccinini Pisa · Serie A 25/26 · 184 cm / 76 kg
74%
Driven by: transition (15%), line-breaking (10%), receiving zones (10%). Different mechanism — Bardeli more via crossing, final-third threat; Piccinini more via box threat.
Brenden Aaronson Leeds · Premier League · 177 cm / 69 kg
73%
Driven by: receiving zones (14%), line-breaking (13%), progression (12%). Different mechanism — Bardeli more via build-up; Aaronson more via transition, ball-winning.
Benja Domínguez Sassuolo · Serie A · 172 cm / 68 kg
73%
Driven by: transition (18%), box threat (17%), progression (10%). Different mechanism — Bardeli more via build-up, final-third threat; Domínguez more via territory (wide vs central), receiving zones.
Mateo Joseph Mallorca 25/26 · 185 cm / 74 kg
73%
Driven by: transition (21%), progression (11%), receiving zones (11%). Different mechanism — Bardeli more via final-third threat, build-up; Joseph more via box threat, territory (wide vs central).
20

Summary

Enzo Bardeli is a half-space creator: 1.57 key passes /90, 2.0 progressive passes, 1 goals from 0.15 xG. A between-the-lines creator. [Off-ball movement into pockets needs tracking.]

Based on 7 matches (459 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a half-space creator — 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 half-space creator 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