Thin sample this season. Nicolás Tagliafico has played 1 match (79 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 (57% of his 46 passes)
83% completion · 46× in 1/1 matches
↓
PROGRESS
carry or combine up the flank
4.6 prog/90 · 4× 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
17 def actions · lost 33% deep · 17× 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.
In possession
In possession
What he does with the ball: build-up, progression, creation, carrying and finishing.
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
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 →
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 middle third: 19% of his 16 touches there are lost (3 times).
17 defensive actions across the season (19.4/90). 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 →
1
tackles · 100% won
2
interceptions · 2.3/90
2
recoveries · 2.3/90
5
clearances · 5.7/90
1
blocks
30
avg action height
4
won high (att 3rd)
2
middle third
11
own third
Vision AI A deep-defending defender. He wins the ball mainly by clearing and blocking — a reactive, protect-the-box profile. 5 proactive ball-wins (5.7/90), tackle success 100%. He defends mostly around the middle third.
Team
Team context
How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.
Lyon's output per match with Nicolás Tagliafico (1 matches) versus without him (7 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 7 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 (7)
Δ
goals against /match
1.00
0.86
+0.14
points /match
1.00
1.86
-0.86
goals for /match
1.00
1.71
-0.71
xG for /match
1.45
0.60
+0.85
06
His Share of the Team
Of everything Lyon produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Nicolás Tagliafico specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.
category
share
him / team
interceptions
8%
22 / 282
progressive passes
7%
102 / 1512
tackles
5%
30 / 566
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 232 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.
Inverted full-back65%Overlapping full-back35%
Why Inverted full-back 65%: a weighted blend of build-up 71 (weight 35%) + retention 68 (weight 30%) + progression 49 (weight 25%) + press resistance 41 (weight 10%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
through-balls, transition, carrying, dribbling, territory (wide vs central)
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Box threat
79
Build-up
71
Defensive aggression
69
Retention
68
Receiving zones
66
Line-breaking
65
Final-third threat
60
Ball-winning
56
Progression
49
Creativity
46
Passing directness
45
Crossing
43
Press resistance ~proxy
41
Through-balls ~proxy
37
Transition ~proxy
35
Carrying
30
Dribbling
18
Territory (wide vs central)
14
08
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: 172 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 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.
Marc Cucurella Real Madrid · La Liga · 174 cm / 66 kg
84%
Driven by: dribbling (20%), territory (wide vs central) (17%), build-up (12%). Different mechanism — Tagliafico more via passing directness; Cucurella more via creativity.
Alberto Moreno Como · Serie A 25/26 · 171 cm / 65 kg
59%
Driven by: dribbling (22%), territory (wide vs central) (18%), build-up (10%). Different mechanism — Tagliafico more via defensive aggression, ball-winning; Moreno more via carrying, creativity.
Álex Valle Como · Serie A · 178 cm / 72 kg
57%
Driven by: dribbling (19%), territory (wide vs central) (13%), transition (13%). Different mechanism — Tagliafico more via box threat, line-breaking.
Jurriën Timber Arsenal · Premier League · 179 cm / 79 kg
51%
Driven by: box threat (26%), territory (wide vs central) (23%), dribbling (13%). Different mechanism — Tagliafico more via build-up; Timber more via through-balls, crossing.
Calvin Verdonk Lille · 174 cm / 69 kg
51%
Driven by: dribbling (25%), defensive aggression (14%), build-up (11%). Different mechanism — Tagliafico more via box threat, through-balls; Verdonk more via territory (wide vs central), creativity.
Giovanni Di Lorenzo Napoli · Serie A · 183 cm / 83 kg
51%
Driven by: box threat (24%), dribbling (14%), build-up (13%). Different mechanism — Lorenzo more via territory (wide vs central), crossing.
09
Summary
Nicolás Tagliafico is an inverted full-back: 4.6 progressive passes and 0 box entries, delivering 0 key passes. Inverted full-back. [1v1 recovery pace and off-ball overlap timing need tracking.]
Based on 1 matches (79 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as an inverted full-back — best used in a system built around that identity.
His biggest room for growth is press resistance — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall inverted 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
