Thin sample this season. Pablo García has played 9 matches (361 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 Wing, Attacking third — between the lines — mostly in the middle third (48% of his 83 passes)
83% completion · 83× in 9/9 matches
↓
TURN / BEAT MAN
face forward in the pocket
46% won · 13× in 6/9 matches
↓
FINISH
arrive and shoot from central zones
2 goals · 1.10 xG · 16× in 9/9 matches
Signature: Receive → Turn / Beat Man → 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: create — 3× (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.
38 tracked carries (9.5/90, 11 progressive, 445m 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.
progressivelateral/short% of his 38 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 9m, longest 26m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
First (18)Second (12)Third (8)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →
Dribbles (1v1s)
Does he carry to create or drift wide? Dribbles by channel. Season rate: 3.24 dribbles attempted /90.
brighter band = more dribbles · own goal left, attacking →
INSIDE 31%
OUTSIDE 69%
Dribble location — 4 inside · 9 outside
Right Wing
6 · 46%
Right Half-Space
1 · 8%
Central
1 · 8%
Left Half-Space
2 · 15%
Left Wing
3 · 23%
Vision AI His carries cluster wide — a drifting playmaker.
02
How does he create chances?
3 key passes (0.75/90), 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 (3)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 (2)from the right (1)of 3 key passes landing in the final thirdattacking ↑ toward goal
07
Can he finish?
16 shots · 1.10 xG · 2 goals (+0.90 vs xG). Mostly left-footed. Circle size = xG.
shots 16 on target 10 goals 2 xG 1.10 xG on target 1.30 xG / shot 0.069
Where he shoots from — click an area of the box
08
Where does he become vulnerable?
21 possessions lost. Directness has a cost — the question is where. Attacking-third losses are cheap; deep ones are dangerous.
12
attacking third (cheap)
7
middle third
2
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 57% of losses are in the attacking third — he gambles where a turnover costs little.
Mistake danger (proxy): 1.16 danger-index/90 · 0.221 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
06
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 3 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays inside from the right hs toward 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 right wing in the final third: 33% of his 15 touches there are lost (5 times).
05
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 38 ball-carries, his dominant tendency is that he carries through central areas (45%). He carries from outside into the middle 10 times and out toward the touchline 5 — a genuine inside forward who cuts in with the ball.
04
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
4 · 11%
Progressive / key pass
3 · 8%
Simple pass
24 · 63%
No clean link
7 · 18%
Of 38 carries, 11% flow straight into a shot of his own, 8% into a key or progressive pass — a genuine end product to the carry, not just ball retention. 18% have no clean link to a next touch of his own close to where the carry ended.
39 defensive actions across the season (9.7/90). 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 →
2
tackles · 50% won
0
interceptions · 0.0/90
13
recoveries · 3.2/90
3
clearances · 0.7/90
1
blocks
48
avg action height
9
won high (att 3rd)
21
middle third
9
own third
Vision AI A front-foot / high defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 15 proactive ball-wins (3.7/90), 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.
18
attacking-half actions · 4.49/90
09
Against Different Pressing Intensities
Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Does Pablo García keep producing when the game is tight and the press is high? Tiers of ~3-3 matches — directional evidence, not proof.
press tier
xT /90
prog /90
key P /90
dribble%
High press (PPDA 4.1, 3m)
0.33
1.0
0.00
60%
Mid press (PPDA 5.2, 3m)
0.29
0.8
1.57
20%
Low press (PPDA 6.0, 3m)
0.26
0.0
1.30
67%
Team
Team context
How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.
Racing Santander's output per match with Pablo García (6 matches) versus without him (4 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 4 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.
WITH (6)
WITHOUT (4)
Δ
goals for /match
1.33
1.75
-0.42
xG for /match
1.15
0.42
+0.73
goals against /match
2.33
3.00
-0.67
points /match
1.17
1.00
+0.17
12
His Share of the Team
Of everything Racing Santander produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Pablo García specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.
category
share
him / team
goals
20%
2 / 10
shots
14%
29 / 212
expected goals (xG)
12%
2.3 / 19.9
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 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 creator26%Advanced playmaker (8)22%
Why Half-space creator 26%: a weighted blend of box threat 71 (weight 15%) + creativity 26 (weight 40%) + dribbling 49 (weight 15%) + final-third threat 8 (weight 30%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Box threat
71
Retention
66
Carrying
63
Defensive aggression
62
Build-up
54
Press resistance ~proxy
53
Transition ~proxy
52
Ball-winning
50
Dribbling
49
Territory (wide vs central)
42
Receiving zones
39
Creativity
26
Passing directness
24
Progression
21
Crossing
15
Final-third threat
8
Line-breaking
5
Through-balls ~proxy
2
14
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: 175 cm / 67 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.
Ilyas Chaira Real Oviedo 25/26 · 179 cm / 75 kg
86%
Driven by: line-breaking (17%), through-balls (15%), final-third threat (15%). Different mechanism — García more via receiving zones, retention; Chaira more via territory (wide vs central).
Rémy Labeau Lascary Auxerre · Ligue 1 · 184 cm / 72 kg
82%
Driven by: final-third threat (18%), through-balls (18%), line-breaking (17%). Different mechanism — García more via receiving zones, transition; Lascary more via territory (wide vs central), crossing.
Wael Mohya Borussia Monchengladbach · Bundesliga · 174 cm / 65 kg
79%
Driven by: through-balls (18%), line-breaking (17%), crossing (13%). Different mechanism — García more via box threat, transition; Mohya more via territory (wide vs central).
Danny Namaso Auxerre · Ligue 1 · 182 cm / 77 kg
76%
Driven by: crossing (18%), final-third threat (15%), progression (15%). Different mechanism — García more via carrying, territory (wide vs central); Namaso more via through-balls.
Josh King Fulham · Premier League · 187 cm / 74 kg
76%
Driven by: line-breaking (22%), through-balls (17%), creativity (14%). Different mechanism — King more via final-third threat, crossing.
Mateo Joseph Mallorca 25/26 · 185 cm / 74 kg
74%
Driven by: final-third threat (18%), through-balls (16%), line-breaking (15%). Different mechanism — García more via carrying, transition.
15
Summary
Pablo García is a half-space creator: 0.75 key passes /90, 0.7 progressive passes, 2 goals from 1.10 xG. A between-the-lines creator. [Off-ball movement into pockets needs tracking.]
Based on 9 matches (361 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 final-third 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.