Vision AI ← BACK TO SEARCH
Team reportPremier League 2025/26
IPS

Ipswich

A territorially-dominated side, aggressive high-press out of possession, with a moderate attack. Currently #12 of 20 on 10 points (3-1-4, 12:16). Tactical profile below is built from 8 matches of ball-by-ball event data, contextualised against the league.

territorially-dominatedaggressive high-pressmoderate attack
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
D
10
points
#12 of 20 · 8 games
12:16
goals
-4 GD
3-1-4
record
W-D-L
1.25
points/game
#12 in the league
1.11
xG for/game
rank #17
1.70
xG against/game
rank #22
#8
press rank
of 23 · most aggressive
43%
field tilt
#18
Ipswich
League average
Expected goals for / game
1.111.31
Expected goals against / game
1.701.37
Field tilt
43%49%
Pass retention
80%79%
Overview

The team

Who they are and how the season went.

Who Are They? — Identity

The question
In one read, what kind of team is Ipswich and how good was the season?
Read. Ipswich currently sit #12 of 20 on 10 points (3W-1D-4L, 1.25 pts/game), scoring 12 and conceding 16 for a goal difference of -4. On the ball they are a territorially-dominated team (43% field tilt, #18 in the league); off it they defend with a aggressive high-press (#8 of 23 for press intensity). Across the 8 matches of event data, they create 1.11 xG/game (#17) and concede 1.70 (#22), a net of -0.58 xG/game — the underlying performance matches the actual goal difference.

Season Context — the league table

The question
Where did Ipswich actually finish, and against whom?

The authoritative final table (full season), centred on Ipswich.

#teamPWDLGFGAGDPts
9Aston Villa8323912-311
10Hull City824298+110
11Everton824289-110
12Ipswich83141216-410
13Bournemouth82331213-19
14Tottenham8233810-29
15Fulham8224810-28

Match Momentum — when they create and concede danger

The question
Across a whole game, which periods does Ipswich actually dominate for chances — and which periods hurt them?

Net xG (created minus conceded) in each 15-minute window, summed across the whole season's matches — above the line is time they dominate for chances, below is time it hurts them. Real on-clock shot timing.

dominant (net xG for)conceding (net xG against)
even0-15'16-30'31-45'46-60'61-75'76-90+'+0.44-2.45
Vision AI Model Insight
Ipswich tend to fade after a strong start — first-half net xG -1.02, second-half -3.65. Their strongest period is 16-30' (net +0.44 xG); their most dangerous period to face is 61-75' (net -2.45 xG against them).

xG Race — the season, match by match

Expected goals piling up over 8 matches: Ipswich against what their opponents created. A line pulling away upwards is a side creating more than it gives away; the gap at the end is the season’s balance (-4.7 xG). Hover a point for that match.

0510158.913.6Sunderland (H) 2-1 · xG 1.10 to 0.82Man Utd (A) 2-5 · xG 0.93 to 4.46Liverpool (H) 0-2 · xG 0.94 to 0.60Crystal Palace (A) 3-2 · xG 1.62 to 0.70Everton (A) 0-1 · xG 1.21 to 1.52Fulham (H) 2-1 · xG 1.07 to 1.15Man City (A) 2-3 · xG 1.46 to 2.48Nottingham Forest (H) 1-1 · xG 0.57 to 1.85M1M2M3M4M5M6M7M8
IpswichOpponents against Ipswich

Tactical DNA

The football question
In five genes, what is Ipswich's footballing identity?

Each gene is a 0–100 score — the team's league percentile across the metrics that define that phase of play. It distils the whole report into an identity fingerprint: the taller the gene, the more that trait defines them.

37
Build-Up
possession control from the back
26
Progression
moving the ball upfield with threat
17
Creation
manufacturing chances
43
Press
winning the ball high & hard
4
Solidity
resisting the opponent's threat
Genetic identity
Ipswich are defined most by their Press DNA (43/100 · average at winning the ball high & hard), and least by their Solidity DNA (4/100). Percentiles vs the 23 teams in the league.

The Playstyle Wheel

Fifteen style metrics across five domains — Possess, Disrupt, Finish, Press, Defend — each a percentile against the rest of the league. Metrics marked ~proxy use the closest available event-data signal where the standard definition needs data this feed doesn't carry (explicit pressure events, offside/keeper-sweep incidents).

Possess17Disrupt64Finish48Press59Defend52
Possess
Deep buildup
9%
Possession
22%
Field tilt
22%
Disrupt
Central progression ~proxy
83%
Dribble tendency
78%
Progressive passes
30%
Finish
Final-third patience
65%
Shot quality
43%
Open-play xG
35%
Press
Forward press ~proxy
65%
High regains
61%
Pressing efficiency ~proxy
52%
Defend
Def-mid press ~proxy
52%
High line ~proxy
83%
PAdj defensive actions
22%
Ipswich is defined most by Disrupt (64% in the league) and weakest on Possess (17%). Percentiles vs the 23 teams in the league this season.
In possession

In possession

How they keep the ball, build up, progress, create and finish, and where their attacks die.

Keeping the ball6 sections

Field Tilt — Territorial Control

The question
How much of the pitch does Ipswich actually control, relative to the rest of the league?

Field tilt = share of final-third touches between the two sides across Ipswich's matches, the standard proxy for territorial dominance. Plotted against points per game for every side in the league — the real question isn't just who controls territory, it's whether that control actually converts into results. Dashed lines mark the league average on each axis; Ipswich highlighted. Hover any dot for the team.

Arsenal: 64% tilt, 2.30 pts/gMan City: 66% tilt, 2.15 pts/gMan Utd: 52% tilt, 1.70 pts/gAston Villa: 49% tilt, 1.65 pts/gLiverpool: 59% tilt, 1.63 pts/gBrighton: 56% tilt, 1.50 pts/gBournemouth: 51% tilt, 1.43 pts/gChelsea: 54% tilt, 1.41 pts/gBrentford: 45% tilt, 1.39 pts/gFulham: 50% tilt, 1.30 pts/gNewcastle: 52% tilt, 1.30 pts/gSunderland: 44% tilt, 1.28 pts/gEverton: 48% tilt, 1.28 pts/gLeeds: 45% tilt, 1.26 pts/gIpswich: 43% tilt, 1.25 pts/gHull City: 33% tilt, 1.25 pts/gCrystal Palace: 44% tilt, 1.13 pts/gNottingham Forest: 48% tilt, 1.09 pts/gTottenham: 52% tilt, 1.09 pts/gWest Ham: 41% tilt, 1.03 pts/gCoventry: 39% tilt, 0.75 pts/gBurnley: 41% tilt, 0.58 pts/gWolves: 39% tilt, 0.53 pts/gIpswich33%44%55%66%0.51.11.72.3FIELD TILT %POINTS / GAME
Vision AI Model Insight
Ipswich post 43% field tilt, ranking #18 of 23 in the league — below the league mid-point, spending more of the game defending their own territory than dictating it, and their 1.25 points/game sits below the league-average return — territory is genuinely converting into results.

Where the time goes — how long each phase lasts

The question
When Ipswich has the ball, how much of that time is spent building, progressing and creating?

The share of Ipswich's time on the ball spent in each phase of play, in the order the phases happen. A phase is where the ball is on the pitch (own third, middle third, final third); a transition or a set piece skips the build-up and is counted on its own.

Build-up: 28.7% of the time on the ball29%Progression: 46.5% of the time on the ball47%Chance creation: 22.0% of the time on the ball22%Attacking transition: 2.8% of the time on the ball47%PROGRESSION
PhaseShare of the time
Build-up28.7%
Progression46.5%
Chance creation22.0%
Attacking transition2.8%
Vision AI Model Insight
Progression is where Ipswich spends most of its time on the ball (47% of its time on the ball).

Passing Network

The question
Who actually plays with whom — the real on-pitch connections, not just average positions?

Every pass linked to its likely receiver (the next same-team touch), aggregated into player-pair combinations at each player's average position. Line width = how often the pair combines; colour = threat generated per pass (blue low → red high). Hover a line for the pair, or click a player to isolate their connections.

Issa Diop ↔ Dara O'Shea: 106 passes, -1.0 combined xTIssa Diop ↔ Abdoul Ouattara: 89 passes, -0.5 combined xTSamuel Amissah ↔ Dara O'Shea: 80 passes, -0.4 combined xTSamuel Amissah ↔ Issa Diop: 74 passes, 0.1 combined xTLeif Davis ↔ Jacob Greaves: 69 passes, -0.1 combined xTExequiel Palacios ↔ Issa Diop: 68 passes, -0.0 combined xTSamuel Amissah ↔ Exequiel Palacios: 66 passes, 0.0 combined xTExequiel Palacios ↔ Leif Davis: 63 passes, -0.3 combined xTExequiel Palacios ↔ Julio Enciso: 59 passes, 0.7 combined xTSamuel Amissah ↔ Jacob Greaves: 55 passes, -0.3 combined xTExequiel Palacios ↔ Dara O'Shea: 53 passes, 0.2 combined xTDara O'Shea ↔ Leif Davis: 49 passes, 0.3 combined xTIssa Diop ↔ Jacob Greaves: 48 passes, -0.1 combined xTExequiel Palacios ↔ Abdoul Ouattara: 46 passes, -0.3 combined xTExequiel Palacios ↔ Florentino: 44 passes, 0.4 combined xTSamuel Amissah ↔ Leif Davis: 42 passes, -0.3 combined xTSamuel Amissah ↔ Julio Enciso: 42 passes, 0.7 combined xTExequiel Palacios ↔ Jacob Greaves: 41 passes, 0.1 combined xTDara O'Shea ↔ Abdul Fatawu: 39 passes, 1.7 combined xTExequiel Palacios ↔ Jack Clarke: 35 passes, -0.0 combined xTJack Clarke ↔ Leif Davis: 35 passes, 0.9 combined xTDara O'Shea ↔ Abdoul Ouattara: 29 passes, -0.4 combined xTSamuel Amissah ↔ Jack Clarke: 26 passes, 0.4 combined xTIssa Diop ↔ Abdul Fatawu: 25 passes, -0.0 combined xTFlorentino — isolate this player's connectionsFlorentinoSamuel Amissah — isolate this player's connectionsAmissahZian Flemming — isolate this player's connectionsFlemmingIssa Diop — isolate this player's connectionsDiopDaizen Maeda — isolate this player's connectionsMaedaDara O'Shea — isolate this player's connectionsO'SheaJulio Enciso — isolate this player's connectionsEncisoEmersonn — isolate this player's connectionsEmersonnLeif Davis — isolate this player's connectionsDavisAbdoul Ouattara — isolate this player's connectionsOuattaraAbdul Fatawu — isolate this player's connectionsFatawuJack Clarke — isolate this player's connectionsClarkeExequiel Palacios — isolate this player's connectionsPalaciosChuba Akpom — isolate this player's connectionsAkpomJacob Greaves — isolate this player's connectionsGreavesJaden Philogene — isolate this player's connectionsPhilogene
width = passes between the paircolour = xT per pass: low → high

Top 10 combinations

Diop ↔ O'Shea
106p · -1.0xT
Diop ↔ Ouattara
89p · -0.5xT
Amissah ↔ O'Shea
80p · -0.4xT
Amissah ↔ Diop
74p · 0.1xT
Davis ↔ Greaves
69p · -0.1xT
Palacios ↔ Diop
68p · -0.0xT
Amissah ↔ Palacios
66p · 0.0xT
Palacios ↔ Davis
63p · -0.3xT
Palacios ↔ Enciso
59p · 0.7xT
Amissah ↔ Greaves
55p · -0.3xT
Vision AI Model Insight
Busiest connection: Issa Diop ↔ Dara O'Shea (106 passes). Most dangerous per pass: Dara O'Shea ↔ Abdul Fatawu (0.04 xT/pass over 39 passes) — the combination that hurts opponents most when it fires, not just the one used most.

Touch Density — where Ipswich had the ball

Every touch across 460 matches. Brighter means more touches.

Which Zones Do They Attack Through?

The question
Across the whole pitch, where does Ipswich actually do its on-ball work?

Passes on one map, carries (the ball travelling with a player) on the other. Each is binned into the 15 pitch zones (three thirds × five vertical lanes) and shaded by its share of that kind of action; the arrows are the real actions.

Passes
the ball moved by a pass
3581
ACTIONS
5%6%13%5%4%8%10%11%11%7%4%3%2%5%7%PASSES
Carries
the ball moved with a player
1401
ACTIONS
3%8%10%4%2%7%13%15%13%7%5%1%2%3%5%CARRIES
Vision AI Model Insight
Their single busiest zone is the centre of the defensive third (12.5% of all actions). 68% of actions run through the inside lanes (centre + both half-spaces) versus 32% down the two wings — an inside-dominant, half-space build. By third: 31% defensive, 49% middle, 20% attacking.

Attack Sides

Which channel they attacked through this season: the share of every action made in the opponent’s half, down the left, through the middle and down the right. Ipswich leaned on their left (42%). The bars under the pitch put the league’s share beside theirs.

42%Left side24%Middle34%Right sideATTACKING →
Ipswich
42%24%34%
League
39%23%38%

Final-Third Entries

Every completed pass or carry that took the ball from outside the final third into it, by the channel it arrived in. Ipswich made 317 this season (39.6 a match); 28% came into the left wing. Longer, bolder arrows mean more entries. Entries by carrying the ball in count as well as completed passes; dribbles are not counted.

Left wing: 90 entries (28%)9028%LEFT WINGLeft half-space: 65 entries (21%)6521%LEFT HALF-SPACECentre: 41 entries (13%)4113%CENTRERight half-space: 41 entries (13%)4113%RIGHT HALF-SPACERight wing: 80 entries (25%)8025%RIGHT WINGATTACKING ↑
ChannelEntriesPer matchShareLeague share
Left wing9011.228%29%
Left half-space658.121%16%
Centre415.113%12%
Right half-space415.113%14%
Right wing8010.025%29%
Build-up2 sections

Build-Up — the pass map

The football question
How does Ipswich progress possession from defence into attack — and who runs it?

Build-up passes grouped into 5 real categories — not the old zone grid, not raw individual lines: CB (passer is a centre-back), Wide→FB, Central, Long Wide, Long Central. Each gets its own panel below, so nothing competes for attention. Arrow width = volume, labelled with the exact count; hover for the top passer.

1170build-up passes attempted
78%completed
26%reach the middle third
2%go long into the final third

Pass types

461CB · 50%
74Long Wide · 8%
9Long Central · 1%
289Wide → FB · 32%
84Central · 9%
CB461 · 50%
right: 286 passes, most from Diop286left: 175 passes, most from Greaves175
Long Wide74 · 8%
right: 42 passes, most from Scherpen42left: 32 passes, most from Walton32
Long Central9 · 1%
left: 5 passes, most from Walton5right: 4 passes, most from Scherpen4
Wide → FB289 · 32%
left: 151 passes, most from Davis151right: 138 passes, most from Walton138
Central84 · 9%
right: 49 passes, most from Scherpen49left: 35 passes, most from Palacios35
◆ Vision AI Insight
Ipswich build predominantly down the right, with Diop as the fulcrum (193 build-up passes). Only 28% of their build-up passes actually advance a third — the rest is lateral circulation, the hallmark of a possession-controlling side that circulates patiently in midfield before progressing. Their single most-repeated pattern is RHS def → C def (60×).

Pass Explorer

Every pass of Ipswich’s last 8 matches as an arrow, theirs first and the opponents’ with other team, each side attacking left to right (solid = completed, dashed grey = failed). Eight families per team — click any map to open it wide, then filter by channel or third, from one to another (or click a cell of the flow grids), by outcome, half, minute and passer. Channels: right wing, right half-space, centre, left half-space, left wing.

Progression4 sections

How They Progress — the mechanism

Not just how many progressive passes, but where they start, who plays them, and whether they actually penetrate. 311 progressive passes across 8 matches (38.9/game).

Origin lane

Right wing
23%
Right half-space
15%
Central
21%
Left half-space
14%
Left wing
27%
Progression is left-dominant: 39% right side · 21% central · 41% left.

Who generates it

Leif Davis
44 · 14%
Dara O'Shea
37 · 12%
Christian Walton
33 · 11%
Abdul Fatawu
21 · 7%
Issa Diop
21 · 7%
Top two — Leif Davis & Dara O'Shea — account for 26% of all progression.
PROGRESSION
38.9 prog passes/game
mostly left
→
PENETRATION
30% reach final third
19% reach the box
→
THREAT
the other 70% is recycled
progress ≠ danger
What came of it. 30% of progressive passes reached the final third and 19% the box; the rest was recycled in front of the block. 26% of the progression ran through two players, mostly down the left side.

Which lanes actually create the threat

Share of passes played from each lane against its share of the threat (xT) they add. Efficient = more threat than volume, sterile = lots of the ball, little damage.

Per lane — volume vs threat
Right wingefficient
Right half-spacebalanced
Centralbalanced
Left half-spacebalanced
Left wingbalanced

Progression — the pass map

The football question
Once Ipswich have the ball in midfield, how do they actually break into the final third — and who carries that job?

Progression passes grouped into 5 real categories: CB, Wide→FB, Central, Long Wide, Long Central. Each gets its own panel below, so nothing competes for attention. Arrow width = volume, labelled with the exact count; hover for the top passer.

1679progression passes attempted
85%completed
16%break into the final third
11%go backward into the defensive third

Pass types

541CB · 38%
39Long Wide · 3%
6Long Central · 0%
641Wide → FB · 45%
208Central · 14%
CB541 · 38%
right: 336 passes, most from Diop336left: 205 passes, most from O'Shea205
Long Wide39 · 3%
left: 27 passes, most from Davis27right: 12 passes, most from Núñez12
Long Central6 · 0%
left: 4 passes, most from Enciso4right: 2 passes, most from Davis2
Wide → FB641 · 45%
left: 396 passes, most from Palacios396right: 245 passes, most from Amissah245
Central208 · 14%
left: 113 passes, most from Amissah113right: 95 passes, most from Palacios95
◆ Vision AI Insight
Ipswich progress predominantly down the left, with Palacios the busiest midfield outlet (208 progression passes). Only 16% of passes that start in midfield actually break the final-third line — the rest (73%) is recycled back into midfield or (11%) played backward, the hallmark of a side that carries progression itself through midfield rather than just passing through it. Their most-repeated pattern is LHS mid → LW mid (86×) — press that lane and midfield progression stalls.

Decision Quality — not all completed passes are equal

A 90% pass completion can hide a sideways habit. Grading every pass by the threat it adds separates value creation from safe circulation.

Excellent (high xT gain)
13%
Progressive
1%
Neutral / sideways
48%
Safe / backward
38%
14% of passes are progressive-or-better; the remaining 86% keep possession without advancing it. A control-first side — safe in build-up, reliant on a few players for the incision.

Carries Map — progressive ball-carries, squad-wide

The question
Where does Ipswich actually progress the ball with their feet, not a pass?

204 progressive carries this season across the whole squad (24% of 844 tracked carries total), grouped into up to 4 spatial patterns by where each carry starts and ends together — not just its origin zone. Median 15m, longest 58m. Most active carrier: Enciso (25). Filter to one player below.

First (59)Second (55)Third (45)Fourth (45)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →
Chance creation4 sections

Chance creation — how the shots come

The question
Where do Ipswich's chances actually come from?

Every shot sorted twice. First by the kind of attack: an attacking transition (the shot came within 15 seconds of winning the ball), a settled attack (open play after the team had the ball), or a set piece. Then by how it was set up: a cross, a cut-back, a long ball, a pass into the box, or no pass at all (the player created it himself). So a cut-back from an attacking transition is counted apart from a cut-back in a settled attack.

84shots
8.9xG
0.11xG per shot
5big chances (0.3+ xG)
12goals
#16key passes / game in the league
#19box entries / game in the league
Attacking transition: 29 shots (35%)35%29Settled attack: 45 shots (54%)54%45Set piece: 10 shots (12%)12%1084SHOTS
Kind of attack, then how the shot was set upShotsGoalsxGxG / shot
Attacking transition 35% of shots2942.440.08
Cross100.060.06
Cut-back210.380.19
Pass into the box / short pass1821.380.08
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)810.610.08
Settled attack 54% of shots4575.260.12
Cross1041.710.17
Cut-back510.640.13
Long ball400.520.13
Pass into the box / short pass1711.760.10
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)910.630.07
Set piece 12% of shots1011.200.12
Corner700.360.05
Free kick200.050.03
Penalty110.790.79

Every attempt to create — and what came of it

Every pass into the box, every cut-back and every pass before a shot. Red led to a shot, gold to a goal; grey ones were tried but no shot came: solid found a team-mate, dashed lost the ball. Filter by outcome, type or player; tap an arrow for the detail.

Who sets the shots up

PlayerSet-upsxG createdGoals
Julio Enciso81.293
Abdul Fatawu71.181
Samuel Amissah80.951
Leif Davis40.581
Jack Clarke50.571

Who takes them

PlayerShotsxGGoals
Julio Enciso231.711
Zian Flemming71.652
Emersonn141.552
Leif Davis70.972
Daizen Maeda40.751
Vision AI Model Insight
The biggest source of Ipswich's chances, by xG, is settled attack (5.3 of 8.9 xG, 45 of 84 shots), mostly pass into the box / short pass. 29 of the 84 shots (35%) came within 15 seconds of winning the ball. 10 of the 84 shots came from set pieces; 12 goals from 8.9 xG (+3.1).

Chance Creation — the pass map

The football question
How does Ipswich consistently create dangerous chances — from which zones, and who creates them?

Key passes (the pass immediately before a shot) grouped into 5 real categories: CB, Wide→FB, Central, Long Wide, Long Central. Each gets its own panel below, so nothing competes for attention. Arrow width = volume, labelled with the exact count; hover for the top creator.

Pass types

11CB · 18%
3Long Wide · 5%
2Long Central · 3%
17Wide → FB · 28%
27Central · 45%

Danger Funnel — which service carries threat

Every key pass pooled by where it was played FROM, then drawn with its arrow width set by total xT rather than by count. A zone that produces a lot of cheap balls shrinks; one that produces a few decisive ones dominates. Where this disagrees with the volume map, the volume map is the misleading one.

0 key passes shown● low threat● mid● high threatarrow width = total xT, not count
CB11 · 18%
left: 7 passes, most from O'Shea7right: 4 passes, most from Ouattara4
Long Wide3 · 5%
left: 2 passes, most from Davis2
Long Central2 · 3%
left: 2 passes, most from Fatawu2
Wide → FB17 · 28%
left: 10 passes, most from Amissah10right: 7 passes, most from Enciso7
Central27 · 45%
left: 18 passes, most from Fatawu18right: 9 passes, most from Clarke9

Who creates — volume × threat

8Fatawu
7Enciso
7Amissah
6Palacios
6Davis
5Clarke
4O'Shea
60key passes #16 of 23
10.1box entries/game #19 of 23
30.8final-3rd entries/game #11 of 23
1.11xG/game #17 of 23
12goals #21 of 23
+3.1finishing vs xG #10 of 23
◆ Vision AI Insight
Ipswich lean right — 43% of their key passes come from that flank and its half-space (26 of 60), most often from Fatawu (8). They funnel chances into the c of the final third, most often via RHS att → C att (10 key passes, most often from Enciso). Fatawu is the primary source overall. They generate 1.11 xG a game and finish it clinical — they beat their xG, led by Zian Flemming (2G), Leif Davis (2G), Emersonn (2G).

Crosses & Cutbacks — squad-wide

The question
How does Ipswich deliver into the box from wide areas, and what comes of it?

77 crosses: 26 found a team-mate (34%), 11 led to a shot (14%). 26 cut-backs: 12 found a team-mate (46%), 7 led to a shot (27%). A cross starts wide and is aimed into the box; a cut-back starts near the byline and is squared back. Grey ones were tried but no shot came: solid found a team-mate, dashed lost the ball.

Crosses by Territory

The question
Which part of the final third does Ipswich actually cross from?

77 crosses this season (the same crosses as the map above), split into fifteen territories — five channels (both wings, both half-spaces and the centre) by three depths from the halfway line to the byline. 23% come from one territory, the advanced left wing; 5 come from the half-spaces and 0 from the centre.

deep right wing: 3 crosses (4%)4%3deep right half-space: 0 crosses (0%)deep centre: 0 crosses (0%)deep left half-space: 0 crosses (0%)deep left wing: 7 crosses (9%)9%7advanced right wing: 16 crosses (21%)21%16advanced right half-space: 1 crosses (1%)1%1advanced centre: 0 crosses (0%)advanced left half-space: 1 crosses (1%)1%1advanced left wing: 18 crosses (23%)23%18byline right wing: 14 crosses (18%)18%14byline right half-space: 2 crosses (3%)3%2byline centre: 0 crosses (0%)byline left half-space: 1 crosses (1%)1%1byline left wing: 14 crosses (18%)18%14
TerritoryCrossesShareLed to a shot
advanced · left wing1823%1
advanced · right wing1621%3
byline · right wing1418%3
byline · left wing1418%3
deep · left wing79%0
deep · right wing34%1
byline · right half-space23%0
advanced · right half-space11%0
advanced · left half-space11%0
byline · left half-space11%0
Finishing3 sections

Shot Map

84 shots for 8.9 xG (1.11/game, #17 in the league). Click an area of the box to see who shoots from there; filter by outcome, player or match.

Moderate attack. 10.5 shots/game at 0.106 xG/shot. Box entries 10/game (#19). Threat created 9.3 xT/game (#18).

Goal Sequences

The move behind each of Ipswich’s 12 goals this season, from the moment they got the ball to the finish. Pick a goal from the list, then step through it or press Play: numbered circles are passes and touches, dotted lines are carries (the ball travelling with a player), dashed grey is a pass that was lost, the star is the shot.

Each goal’s possession, rebuilt from the raw event feed — 12 goals traced.

How Do They Score?

The question
Where do the goals actually come from — open play, dead balls, which foot?

Every goal Ipswich scored across the loaded matches, broken down by how it was created and finished.

By situation

Open play
11 · 92%
Set pieces
0 · 0%
Penalties
1 · 8%

By finish

Right foot
5 · 42%
Left foot
4 · 33%
Header
3 · 25%
Vision AI Model Insight
12 goals scored. 92% come in open play; set pieces add 0%. Open play is clearly their main route to goal.
When they lose it1 section

Ball-Loss Map — where attacks die

Every turnover has a location and a cause. This is a rate, not a raw count — the share of pass attempts from each zone that end in a turnover, so a zone they simply play through more often doesn't automatically look riskier. Grey cells are real zones with too few attempts to trust a rate.

Loss rate by zone

35 of 162 pass attempts lost here (22%).22%35/162O'Shea31 of 209 pass attempts lost here (15%).15%31/209Scherpen118 of 477 pass attempts lost here (25%).25%118/477Walton30 of 181 pass attempts lost here (17%).17%30/181Davis39 of 141 pass attempts lost here (28%).28%39/141Davis63 of 275 pass attempts lost here (23%).23%63/275O'Shea44 of 353 pass attempts lost here (12%).12%44/353Fatawu47 of 397 pass attempts lost here (12%).12%47/397Palacios55 of 396 pass attempts lost here (14%).14%55/396O'Shea35 of 258 pass attempts lost here (14%).14%35/258Davis44 of 132 pass attempts lost here (33%).33%44/132Fatawu36 of 111 pass attempts lost here (32%).32%36/111Fatawu17 of 86 pass attempts lost here (20%).20%17/86Emersonn47 of 167 pass attempts lost here (28%).28%47/167Davis65 of 236 pass attempts lost here (28%).28%65/236Davisattacking →

How they lose it

Incomplete pass — attacking third
209
Failed forward pass
142
Failed take-on
92
Lost in the defensive third
253
Their weakest zone is the right wing in the attacking third: 33% of 132 pass attempts there are lost (44 times). Separately, 30% of all losses happen in the attacking third — a fair share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Out of possession

Out of possession

How they press, where they win the ball back, and how they concede.

Pressing2 sections

Pressing — the full picture

The football question
How hard does Ipswich press, where, and does it actually work — beyond a single PPDA number?

A composite Pressing Index built from four event-derived dimensions, each ranked against the league. Not one metric — intensity, height, effectiveness and opponent disruption together. The pitch shows every defensive action (the only five events this data records); the white line is the average height that feeds the score. Toggle by action type below, hover any dot for the player.

64
Pressing Index
/100 · strong
Intensity71
PPDA, high-press share, high-zone actions
Height83
how high up the pitch they defend
Effectiveness57
high recoveries & high-regain share
Disruption46
opponent completion & progression allowed

Every defensive action & where it happens

Where they win the ball back — by lane

RW
16%
RHS
20%
C
29%
LHS
19%
LW
16%
By third (high / mid / low regain)
Def 46%
Mid 39%
Att 15%
Read
Ranked #8 of 23 for press intensity, this is a high press. 54% of defensive actions happen in the middle & attacking thirds, at an average height of 39. Of recoveries, 54% are won high up the pitch.

Every pressing metric, ranked in the league

metricvaluerankmeaning
PPDA (opp passes per def action)—#8/23lower = more intense; rank is what matters
Defensive actions / game153#8/23
High-press share22%#7/23def actions won high up
Defensive-action height (0–100)38.8#4/23avg pitch height of actions
High recoveries / game22.5#9/23ball won in mid+att third
High-recovery share54%#11/23share of recoveries won high
Opponent completion allowed84%#21/23lower = more disruptive
Opponent progressive allowed8.3%#4/23of opp passes, lower = better
Transition timing
This source carries per-event timestamps, so genuine transition metrics — counter-attack shots, press→shot conversions, time-to-recover — are measured; see the dedicated Transitions section below.

How long they keep it — passes and seconds until the ball is won

The question
Once the opponent has the ball, how many passes and how many seconds pass before Ipswich win it back with a defensive action?

Counted over the 267 opposition possessions that Ipswich ended with a tackle, interception, recovery or challenge. Fewer passes and seconds means the ball is won quickly (a press); more means the opponent is allowed to play before Ipswich step in. Ipswich win it after 6.8 opponent passes in the first half-hour and after 6.0 after the hour mark (sooner).

PASSES THEY GET
6.4passes
median 4 · before Ipswich win it
TIME THEY KEEP IT
19sec
median 10s · 33.4 wins per game
How many passes the opponent got in before the ball was won
35%
24%
16%
24%
0–2 passes3–5 passes6–9 passes10+ passes
Through the match — every 15 minutes
0–15′
7.5
24s
15–30′
6.1
18s
30–45+′
7.4
22s
45–60′
5.8
17s
60–75′
4.9
13s
75–90+′
6.8
19s
average passesaverage seconds

Attitude in each third

Every other style number here says how much Ipswich does. This says how: wide or central, short or long, patient or direct. Bars are standard deviations from the league mean for passes played from that third; a solid bar marks a dimension where Ipswich are genuinely unusual, and a verdict is only written where something clears 0.85 sd — a side that is ordinary in a third is told so rather than given a label for average play.

Build-up (own third) 1,170 passes

nothing unusual in this zone

Width of use-0.5119.95
Wide-channel share-0.520.27
Side bias-0.28-0.88
Pass length+0.2223.49
Long-ball share+0.260.25
Forward gain per pass+0.2712.64
Backward-pass share+0.180.21
Deep-pass share+0.140.30
Completion-0.210.78
Seconds between passes-0.543.00
Side used

left 25% · central 47% · right 28%

Progression (middle third) 1,679 passes

played inside

Width of use-0.6824.13
Wide-channel share-0.910.34
Side bias-0.02-0.00
Pass length-0.4716.56
Long-ball share-0.500.08
Forward gain per pass-0.462.92
Backward-pass share+0.260.35
Deep-pass share-0.540.13
Completion+0.140.85
Seconds between passes-0.163.12
Side used

left 35% · central 32% · right 33%

Final third 732 passes

left-sided

Width of use-0.4230.58
Wide-channel share-0.650.53
Side bias+1.067.03
Pass length-0.2315.11
Long-ball share-0.360.08
Forward gain per pass-0.360.56
Backward-pass share+0.310.41
Deep-pass share+0.070.09
Completion+0.170.71
Seconds between passes+0.143.50
Side used

left 51% · central 16% · right 32%

Reference measured across roughly 3,500 match-teams in this competition, per third, so the comparison is with Ipswich's own league. The means behave as football should: width of use grows 21.0 → 25.6 → 31.6 going forward, pass length shrinks 22.7 → 17.2 → 15.5 m, and completion is hardest in the final third. Tempo is integer-resolution because the feed records whole seconds.

Transitions1 section

Transitions — attacking & defensive

The question
When Ipswich win or lose the ball, what actually happens in the seconds after?

Reconstructed from the full timestamped event stream: real possession spells (not zone-clustered), and shots that follow a regain within a fixed window. This phase of play needs ordered, per-event timestamps — which every match here carries.

Direct play share17%
#13 of 23 · reaches final third in ≤3 passes
Patient build-up share24%
#12 of 23 · spells of 6+ passes
Tempo (possession length)15.7s
#5 of 23 · shorter = faster tempo
Passes per possession4.2
#11 of 23
Counter-attack shots /game1.00
#13 of 23 · shot within 12s of a regain in own half
Press→shot /game2.75
#16 of 23 · shot within 8s of a high regain
Speed to final third after regain13.3s
#16 of 23 · lower = faster break
Vision AI Model Insight
Ipswich are balanced between tempo and patience: 17% of possessions reach the final third in 3 passes or fewer (#13 of 23), against 24% built patiently over 6+ passes (#12 of 23). Winning the ball back leads to a shot inside 12 seconds 1.00 times a game (#13), and a high regain converts to a shot within 8 seconds 2.75 times a game (#16 of 23) — not yet a major source of chances.
Defending the box2 sections

Vulnerability Map — how opponents hurt them

The report flipped: where do opponents create their threat against Ipswich? 381 opponent progressive passes and 135 shots faced (13.6 xG against) across the season.

Opponent threat by lane (attacking into Ipswich)

Right wing
27%
Right half-space
15%
Central
14%
Left half-space
17%
Left wing
27%
Where the danger came from. Opponents generated most of their threat through the right wing (27% of the danger conceded).

How Do They Concede?

The question
Where do the goals against Ipswich actually come from — open play, dead balls, and who supplies them?

Every goal Ipswich conceded across the loaded matches — the opponent's shots in Ipswich's own matches — plus every individual opponent key pass faced, each drawn as its own real arrow (not zone-clustered) with the % share of each zone behind it.

Where the goals go in

← opponent shot at own goal

Every opponent key pass against them (92 total)

2%3%7%1%1%14%18%22%22%10%Trai HumeTrai HumeTrai HumeGranit XhakaNoah SadikiReinildo MandavaReinildo MandavaGranit XhakaMarcus RashfordBryan MbeumoDiogo DalotMatheus CunhaBryan MbeumoMatheus CunhaYouri TielemansDiogo DalotMarcus RashfordBruno FernandesDiogo DalotBruno FernandesYouri TielemansYouri TielemansPatrick DorguBruno FernandesBryan MbeumoBenjamin SeskoHarrison ArmstrongJack GrealishJack GrealishAinsley Maitland-NilesHarrison ArmstrongJack GrealishKiernan Dewsbury-HallJack GrealishJack GrealishAinsley Maitland-NilesTyler DiblingKiernan Dewsbury-HallJames GarnerThierno BarryTyler DiblingCody GakpoCody GakpoAlexis Mac AllisterCody GakpoFlorian WirtzFlorian WirtzJérémy JacquetDominik SzoboszlaiDominik SzoboszlaiBradley BarcolaTyrick MitchellDaichi KamadaAnan KhalailiAdam WhartonJørgen Strand LarsenDaichi KamadaWill HughesSaša LukicKenny TeteOscar BobbSander BergeSaša LukicJosh KingJosh KingSaša LukicKenny TetePhil FodenMateo KovacicJérémy DokuNico O'ReillyPhil FodenRúben DiasMateo KovacicMateo KovacicMarc GuéhiPhil FodenEnzo FernándezIliman NdiayeErling HaalandErling HaalandEnzo FernándezNikola MilenkovicMorgan Gibbs-WhiteDaniel MuñozXaver SchlagerDan NdoyeNeco WilliamsNeco WilliamsMorgan Gibbs-WhiteXaver SchlagerMorgan Gibbs-White← own goal

By situation

Open play
12 · 80%
Set pieces
2 · 13%
Penalties
1 · 7%
Vision AI Model Insight
15 goals conceded. 80% come in open play; set pieces account for only 13%, so dead-ball defending is not the main issue. 7% are headers — aerial defending is not where the damage comes from. Their supply line runs mainly through the centre of the attacking third (22% of key passes faced) — that is the zone to shut off.
Context

Shape and tactics

Set pieces, strengths and weaknesses, and who they resemble.

Premium
Tactical Phase Read
The tactical idea behind each phase of this team's play, written from the same numbers shown above — what they do in build-up, how they progress, where they create, and how they defend it.
Subscribe →

Set-Piece Threat

How much of the goal threat is manufactured from dead balls — a route to goal that bypasses their open-play mechanism entirely.

Open play
11 g · 7.7 xG
Set pieces
0 g · 0.4 xG
Penalties
1 g
0% of goals come from set pieces (0 of 12), worth 0.4 xG from 9 shots. Set pieces are a secondary threat; the danger is in open play.

Where do Ipswich's corners go?

23 corners taken this season, split by which flag they were taken from — arrows from the flag, dots at the delivery point, shaded by % of that side's corners landing in each zone (same treatment as the concede map below). No swing-direction (inswinger/outswinger) data is recorded here, only a start and end point per pass, which cannot show how the ball curved — so this shows what is genuinely knowable: where it lands, and short vs actually delivered. Tap or hover a dot for who took it and the match; filter to one match below and the shading recomputes for just that game.

Right side (11)

9%9%18%18%45%
Delivered into the box 100%Short 0%

Left side (12)

8%8%42%42%
Delivered into the box 100%Short 0%

Where opponents attack Ipswich from set pieces

17 shots from opponent corners against Ipswich, 1 conceded, split by the flag the corner came from — arrows from the flag, dots where the shot was taken (gold = goal), shaded by the % of that flag's shots in each zone. Tap or hover a shot for who took it, the minute and the match; filter to one match and the shading recomputes for just that game.

Right flag (7)

57%29%14%
Shot 7Goals 0

Left flag (10)

40%20%20%10%10%
Shot 10Goals 1

Tactical Strengths & Weaknesses

Strengths (top-third vs league)
  • press intensity (PPDA) — 5.65 (65th pct)
Weaknesses (bottom-third vs league)
  • xG conceded /game — 1.70 (4th pct)
  • shots /game — 10.50 (9th pct)
  • box entries /game — 10.12 (17th pct)
  • field tilt % — 42.97 (22th pct)
  • threat created /game — 9.32 (22th pct)

Style Archetype & Similar Teams

Team archetype: Direct / counter high-press. Their closest stylistic matches in the league (cosine similarity on style metrics) — sides that play a similar way.

Burnley
76%
Sunderland
53%
Coventry
51%
Wolves
40%
West Ham
38%

Performance vs Opponent Styles

The question
Not just how Ipswich results against a high press or a low block — how does their own play actually change?

Every match split into three tiers by how hard that specific opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower means a more aggressive press), matching Ipswich's own passing behaviour to the result.

Results

opponent typegoals for/ggoals against/gpoints/g
vs high-pressing opponents (2m)2.002.001.50
vs mid-block opponents (2m)2.503.501.50
vs low-block opponents (4m)0.751.251.00

Behaviour — how Ipswich actually play against each

opponent typeretentiondirectness (long balls)prog. passes/gxT/gbox entries/g
vs high-pressing opponents78%18%417.79.0
vs mid-block opponents81%12%348.911.0
vs low-block opponents81%12%4010.310.2
Vision AI Model Insight
Facing a high press, retention drops to 78% vs 81% against a low block (3pt lower under pressure), and directness (long-ball share) sits at 18% when pressed vs 12% against a low block — a real style switch: they go noticeably more direct when pressed rather than trying to play through it.

Scouting Summary — the team in brief

In brief. Ipswich are territorially-dominated with a aggressive high-press. Their attack creates 1.11 xG a game and they concede 1.70 a game. [Event-data based — no tracking, so off-ball structure and marking scheme need video.]
Squad

Players

Who drives the numbers.

Against Their Own Norm

For each of ten match numbers, the one match this season that departed furthest from Ipswich’s own average, the eight biggest swings first. Bar right of centre means more than usual, left means less. It shows how much the way they play moves from game to game, and which opponent moved it.

Ipswich
across 8 matches this season
Pass accuracyvs Sunderland · 2-1 · 2026-08-2277%avg 80%
Threat from passingat Man Utd · 2-5 · 2026-08-301.87avg 4.64
Progressive passesat Man Utd · 2-5 · 2026-08-3020avg 39
PPDAat Crystal Palace · 3-2 · 2026-09-124.4avg 5.6
Expected goalsvs Nottingham Forest · 1-1 · 2026-10-230.57avg 1.11
Passesat Man City · 2-3 · 2026-10-17339avg 448
Progressive carriesat Man City · 2-3 · 2026-10-1721avg 39
Defensive actionsat Man City · 2-3 · 2026-10-17177avg 153

On-Ball Value — who moved the game

Every pass, carry, take-on, shot and ball win is worth the change it made to the chance of scoring minus the chance of conceding in the next 10 seconds. This is Ipswich’s last 8 matches added up: where the value came from, who produced it, and the six biggest single moves. OBV only measures what a player does with the ball: it shows who added the most on-ball value, not who was the most important player (defending off the ball, positioning and pressing are not in it).

+12.0on-ball value, 8 matches
Where the value came from
Passes3581 actions+3.99
Carries844 actions+0.21
Dribbles147 actions-0.20
Shots84 actions+5.48
Ball wins479 actions+2.53
Most on-ball value (OBV)ActionsOBVper 100
Julio Enciso376+3.20+0.85
Zian Flemming54+1.58+2.92
Abdul Fatawu255+1.12+0.44
Dara O'Shea509+0.87+0.17
Issa Diop576+0.84+0.15
Jack Clarke177+0.75+0.42
Christian Walton208+0.71+0.34
Emersonn118+0.52+0.44
123456
Biggest single movesOBV
1  Zian Flemming · shot+0.865
2  Abdul Fatawu · pass+0.526
3  Julio Enciso · pass+0.497
4  Julio Enciso · shot+0.352
5  Dara O'Shea · shot+0.298
6  Christian Walton · pass_fail+0.291

Set Pieces by Player

Who delivers Ipswich’s dead balls and who finishes them this season. 23 corners taken, most by Samuel Amissah (9); 9 shots from corners and free kicks, 0 goals. “Into the box” counts corners that landed inside the penalty area; free-kick takers are the players who shot from one, because this feed does not mark who delivers the others.

PlayerCorners takenInto the boxSet-piece shotsGoalsxGFree-kick shotsPenalties
Samuel Amissah99 (100%)1—0.04——
Abdul Fatawu88 (100%)1—0.02——
Zian Flemming——1—0.12—1/1
Leif Davis22 (100%)1—0.031—
Marcelino Núñez11 (100%)1—0.04——
Julio Enciso——1—0.031—
Jacob Greaves——1—0.04——
Emersonn——1—0.06——
Dara O'Shea——1—0.02——
Jaden Philogene21 (50%)——0.00——
Exequiel Palacios10 (0%)——0.00——

Top Performers

Ranked by Vision AI Score — the same tactical behavioural evaluation each player's own report page shows (min 216 minutes). Coloured chips are that player's strongest capability blocks.

playerposminVision AI Scorecapability blocks
Julio EncisoAM6636.7Box Threat 81%Ball-Carrying 80%Chance Creation 42%
Exequiel PalaciosCM5234.6Progression 80%Ball-Carrying 50%Chance Creation 46%Successful Dribble 9%
Dara O'SheaCB7764.5Ball-Winning 74%Progression 60%Aerial & Box Defending 27%Ball-Carrying 11%
Samuel AmissahCM5053.6Ball-Carrying 51%Successful Dribble 34%Chance Creation 33%Progression 28%
EmersonnST5233.4Finishing 50%Ball-Carrying 47%Box Threat 37%Aerial Threat 0%
Abdul FatawuW4883.4Ball-Carrying 68%Chance Creation 50%Wide Delivery 36%Box Threat 0%
Leif DavisFB7762.9Wide Delivery 34%Ball-Carrying 14%Ball-Winning 10%
Issa DiopCB7762.4Ball-Carrying 49%Ball-Winning 39%Progression 36%Aerial & Box Defending 16%
Abdoul OuattaraCB4612.1Ball-Winning 46%Progression 39%Ball-Carrying 26%Aerial & Box Defending 3%
Jacob GreavesCB4641.4Progression 41%Ball-Carrying 31%Ball-Winning 30%Aerial & Box Defending 12%

Top Creators

Chance creation leaders — key passes /90 and box entries.

playerposminkey P /90box entriesxT
Julio EncisoM6630.95164.8
Abdul FatawuM4881.48114.2
Leif DavisD7760.70117.8
Dara O'SheaD7760.4699.9
Jack ClarkeM2651.7063.2
Samuel AmissahM5051.2545.6
EmersonnF5230.6950.8
Abdoul OuattaraD4610.5964.2

Wide Delivery Leaders

Crosses and cutbacks — wingers and full-backs only (by real average position, not the raw D/M position code), ranked by combined volume.

playerposmincrosses (completed)cutbacks (completed)
Leif DavisFB7768 (25%)9 (22%)
Abdul FatawuW4889 (22%)4 (25%)
Jack ClarkeW2654 (25%)2 (0%)

Defensive Volume Leaders

Who does the defensive work — tackles, interceptions, recoveries.

playerposmindef actionstacklesinterceptrecoveries
Dara O'SheaD776159141232
Issa DiopD77612681638
Exequiel PalaciosM52310718850
EmersonnF52385417
Leif DavisD776776617
Julio EncisoM663775436
Samuel AmissahM5057511719
Abdoul OuattaraD461736628

Full Squad Data

Every player with 100+ minutes (19 players).

playerposappsmingoalsxGkey PprogdefxT
Leif DavisD877621.0644777.8
Dara O'SheaD877610.24371599.9
Issa DiopD877610.32211266.6
Julio EncisoM866311.7718774.8
EmersonnF852321.645850.8
Exequiel PalaciosM752300.06191075.8
Samuel AmissahM650512.2717755.6
Abdul FatawuM748800.2821684.2
Jacob GreavesD546400.0211733.2
Abdoul OuattaraD846110.1311734.2
Daizen MaedaM845010.814640.5
Christian WaltonG439400.0133117.1
Kjell ScherpenG438200.0019154.4
Jack ClarkeM726510.4517313.2
FlorentinoM526100.8211482.5
Jaden PhilogeneM418900.204240.6
Zian FlemmingF6171138.613270.7
Chuba AkpomF616410.700300.1
Marcelino NúñezM214000.0110251.5

Player Role Architecture

The question
Who does what — and what tactical job does each key player actually perform?

The nine most-used players (450+ minutes), each with the role their event fingerprint points to — not just their listed position.

Issa Diop
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes776
goals · xG1 · 0.3
prog passes /902.4
key passes /900.23
def actions /9014.6
pass accuracy92%
Leif Davis
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes776
goals · xG2 · 1.0
prog passes /905.1
key passes /900.70
def actions /908.9
pass accuracy76%
Dara O'Shea
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes776
goals · xG1 · 0.2
prog passes /904.3
key passes /900.46
def actions /9018.4
pass accuracy78%
Julio Enciso
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes663
goals · xG1 · 1.7
prog passes /902.4
key passes /900.95
def actions /9010.5
pass accuracy79%
Exequiel Palacios
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes523
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /903.3
key passes /901.03
def actions /9018.4
pass accuracy90%
Emersonn
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes523
goals · xG2 · 1.6
prog passes /900.9
key passes /900.69
def actions /9014.6
pass accuracy70%
Samuel Amissah
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes505
goals · xG1 · 2.2
prog passes /903.0
key passes /901.25
def actions /9013.4
pass accuracy87%
Abdul Fatawu
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes488
goals · xG0 · 0.2
prog passes /903.9
key passes /901.48
def actions /9012.5
pass accuracy60%
Jacob Greaves
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes464
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /902.1
key passes /900.39
def actions /9014.2
pass accuracy89%

Recruitment Intelligence — profiles to sign

The question
If you were sporting director, which player profiles would move the needle most?

Each recruitment target is derived directly from the team's weakest areas vs the league — the gap, why it shows in the data, and the profile that closes it.

Need — bottom-third: xG conceded /game (4th pct)
Sign a defensive organiser / shot-suppressing centre-back. The data flags this because too much xG is conceded (1.70, 4th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: shots /game (9th pct)
Sign a shot-taking forward to raise shot volume. The data flags this because shot volume is low (10.50, 9th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: box entries /game (17th pct)
Sign a penetrative wide player or runner to create box entries. The data flags this because few entries into the box (10.12, 17th percentile vs the league).
Vision AI · building report