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 reportLigue 1 2026

Prosper Peter

Angers
Penalty-box poacher ST
3.0 shots/90 · 0.19 xG per shot — shoots from high-value spots · 0.55 xG/90
strikertransition runnerbox threatfinishing
366
minutes
8 apps
2
goals
2.24 xG
2.2
xG
12 shots
12
shots
0.19 xG/shot
0
box entries
0.00/90
2
key passes
0.49/90
6
dribbles
17% won
79%
pass completion
42 passes
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

Thin sample this season. Prosper Peter has played 8 matches (366 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.

LINK
lay-off and combine
2 key passes · 79% completion · 42× in 8/8 matches
↓
FINISH
shoot from central zones
2.24 xG · 12× in 5/8 matches
↓
CONVERT
goals vs expected
2 goals (-0.2 vs xG) · 2× in 5/8 matches
Signature: Link → Finish → Convert — 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: receive / move — 0× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet) — 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.

03

How does he create chances?

2 key passes (0.49/90), 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:
50%50%
chance creation (2)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 (1)from the right (1)of 2 key passes landing in the final thirdattacking ↑ toward goal
02

Can he finish?

12 shots · 2.24 xG · 2 goals (-0.24 vs xG). Mostly head-footed. Circle size = xG.

shots  12
on target  7
goals  2
xG  2.24
xG on target  1.73
xG / shot  0.187
Where he shoots from — click an area of the box
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 →
Where do his chances come from?
Of 2 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he switches it out from the right hs to the right wing 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 central in the middle third: 20% of his 10 touches there are lost (2 times).
—1 touch · too few—1 touch · too few—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—2 touches · too few—7 touches · too few20%2/10 lost—5 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—2 touches · too few—4 touches · too few—3 touches · too few—2 touches · too few—3 touches · too fewRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

06

How & where does he defend?

40 defensive actions across the season (9.8/90). 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 →
1
tackles · 100% won
0
interceptions · 0.0/90
10
recoveries · 2.5/90
1
clearances · 0.2/90
1
blocks
53
avg action height
13
won high (att 3rd)
20
middle third
7
own third
Vision AI A front-foot / high defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 11 proactive ball-wins (2.7/90), tackle success 100%. 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 · 4.43/90
05

Against Different Pressing Intensities

Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Does Prosper Peter 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)
0.17
2.5
1.25
50%
Mid press (PPDA 4.5, 2m)
0.15
1.6
0.00
0%
Low press (PPDA 6.3, 4m)
0.04
0.0
0.38
0%
Team

Team context

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

07

Impact on the Team

Insufficient sample: Prosper Peter played nearly every Angers match in the loaded data, so there is no meaningful "without him" comparison yet. This section fills in as more matches (and the rest of the season) are scraped.

08

His Share of the Team

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

category
share
him / team
expected goals (xG)
23%
7.0 / 31.0
goals
22%
2 / 9
shots
11%
35 / 328
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 299 strikers 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 runner49%Pressing forward48%False 933%Target man31%
Why Transition runner 49%: a weighted blend of transition 50 (weight 45%) + defensive aggression 54 (weight 30%) + box threat 43 (weight 25%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
—
Strong
—
Average
crossing, defensive aggression, through-balls, transition, passing directness, box threat, line-breaking, build-up, ball-winning
Weak
carrying, retention, progression, territory (wide vs central), creativity, press resistance, receiving zones, final-third threat, dribbling
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Crossing
67
Defensive aggression
54
Through-balls ~proxy
52
Transition ~proxy
50
Passing directness
47
Box threat
43
Line-breaking
43
Build-up
41
Ball-winning
41
Carrying
40
Retention
38
Progression
35
Territory (wide vs central)
34
Creativity
34
Press resistance ~proxy
32
Receiving zones
29
Final-third threat
21
Dribbling
17
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: 188 cm) 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 Ligue 1, Bundesliga, La Liga, 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.

Mostafa Mohamed Nantes 25/26 · 185 cm / 88 kg
80%
Driven by: dribbling (20%), press resistance (16%), receiving zones (13%). Different mechanism — Peter more via retention, carrying; Mohamed more via ball-winning.
Roberto Fernández Espanyol · La Liga · 186 cm / 78 kg
79%
Driven by: final-third threat (20%), dribbling (15%), receiving zones (12%). Different mechanism — Peter more via passing directness, through-balls.
Caleb Ekuban Genoa · Serie A 25/26 · 188 cm / 80 kg
74%
Driven by: receiving zones (18%), final-third threat (14%), press resistance (13%). Different mechanism — Peter more via crossing; Ekuban more via dribbling, ball-winning.
Nikola Stulic Lecce · Serie A · 188 cm / 80 kg
74%
Driven by: dribbling (17%), final-third threat (15%), press resistance (10%). Different mechanism — Peter more via line-breaking, passing directness.
Kevin Carlos Cagliari · Serie A · 186 cm / 98 kg
74%
Driven by: dribbling (15%), receiving zones (14%), final-third threat (13%). Different mechanism — Peter more via transition, creativity.
Ante Budimir Osasuna · La Liga · 190 cm / 75 kg
72%
Driven by: dribbling (16%), press resistance (15%), final-third threat (11%). Different mechanism — Peter more via crossing, retention; Budimir more via passing directness, box threat.
11

Summary

Prosper Peter is a transition runner: 2 goals from 2.24 xG (-0.24 vs expected), 12 shots, 0 box entries. Under-performing his chances. [Off-ball runs, aerials and hold-up under contact need tracking/aerial data.]

Based on 8 matches (366 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 box threat — 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