Thin sample this season. Adama Boiro has played 1 match (24 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 — wide or inverted — mostly in the middle third (56% of his 9 passes)
89% completion · 9× in 1/1 matches
↓
PROGRESS
carry or combine up the flank
7.5 prog/90 · 2× in 1/1 matches
↓
DRIBBLE
beat his man up the line
0% won · 1× in 1/1 matches
↓
DEFEND
1v1 and cover on his side
7 def actions · lost 50% deep · 7× in 1/1 matches
Signature: Receive → Progress → Dribble → Defend — the only steps proven repeatable this season (4 of 5 in the full pattern). Not enough evidence yet for the rest of the chain below.
Not a pattern: deliver — 0× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet) — omitted from the signature rather than presented as one.
Team
Team context
How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.
Athletic Club's output per match with Adama Boiro (1 matches) versus without him (8 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 8 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. What his own defending should move — goals conceded and results — leads; attacking output (largely out of a defender's hands) is shown after, for context. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.
WITH (1)
WITHOUT (8)
Δ
goals against /match
2.00
0.88
+1.12
points /match
0.00
1.50
-1.50
goals for /match
0.00
1.50
-1.50
xG for /match
0.31
0.49
-0.19
03
His Share of the Team
Of everything Athletic Club produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Adama Boiro specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.
category
share
him / team
interceptions
5%
18 / 382
final-third entries
3%
60 / 1954
tackles
3%
18 / 601
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 233 full-backs 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.
Overlapping full-back56%Inverted full-back52%
Why Overlapping full-back 56%: a weighted blend of crossing 58 (weight 30%) + final-third threat 61 (weight 25%) + transition 48 (weight 25%) + dribbling 53 (weight 20%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
creativity, passing directness, territory (wide vs central), box threat
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Retention
68
Defensive aggression
64
Final-third threat
61
Carrying
60
Ball-winning
59
Crossing
58
Press resistance ~proxy
56
Receiving zones
56
Dribbling
53
Transition ~proxy
48
Build-up
46
Progression
43
Line-breaking
42
Through-balls ~proxy
40
Creativity
37
Passing directness
37
Territory (wide vs central)
37
Box threat
12
05
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: 183 cm / 75 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.
Andoni Gorosabel Athletic Club · 174 cm / 70 kg
60%
Driven by: box threat (30%), retention (12%), creativity (9%). Different mechanism — Gorosabel more via through-balls, box threat.
Ignace Van der Brempt Sassuolo · Serie A · 187 cm / 76 kg
57%
Driven by: box threat (36%), creativity (14%), defensive aggression (12%). Different mechanism — Boiro more via final-third threat, passing directness; Brempt more via build-up.
Carlos Puga Malaga · 175 cm / 70 kg
55%
Driven by: box threat (38%), defensive aggression (18%), ball-winning (11%). Different mechanism — Puga more via territory (wide vs central), dribbling.
Jorrel Hato Chelsea · Premier League · 182 cm / 77 kg
47%
Driven by: box threat (24%), retention (18%), territory (wide vs central) (11%). Different mechanism — Boiro more via final-third threat, territory (wide vs central); Hato more via build-up, retention.
Reinildo Mandava Sunderland · Premier League · 183 cm / 73 kg
46%
Driven by: box threat (35%), creativity (19%), retention (8%). Different mechanism — Boiro more via crossing, receiving zones.
Genesis Antwi Strasbourg · Ligue 1 · 189 cm
44%
Driven by: box threat (33%), creativity (14%), retention (13%). Different mechanism — Boiro more via final-third threat, receiving zones; Antwi more via build-up, dribbling.
06
Summary
Adama Boiro is an overlapping full-back: 7.5 progressive passes and 0 box entries, delivering 0 key passes. Overlap-first full-back. [1v1 recovery pace and off-ball overlap timing need tracking.]
Based on 1 matches (24 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as an overlapping full-back — 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 overlapping full-back 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
