Combining every season — this one is larger, give it a moment.
Team reportLa Liga 2025/26
Alaves
A balanced-territory side, aggressive high-press out of possession, with a moderate attack. Finished #14 of 20 on 43 points (11-10-17, 44:56). Tactical profile below is built from 38 matches of ball-by-ball event data, contextualised against the league.
In one read, what kind of team is Alaves and how good was the season?
Read. Alaves finished #14 of 20 on 43 points (11W-10D-17L, 1.13 pts/game), scoring 44 and conceding 56 for a goal difference of -12.
On the ball they are a balanced-territory team (48% field tilt, #11 in the league); off it they defend with a aggressive high-press (#7 of 20 for press intensity).
Across the 38 matches of event data, they create 1.22 xG/game (#12) and concede 1.17 (#5), a net of +0.05 xG/game — the underlying performance diverges from the actual goal difference.
Season Context — the league table
The question
Where did Alaves actually finish, and against whom?
The authoritative final table (full season), centred on Alaves.
#
team
P
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
11
Espanyol
38
12
10
16
43
55
-12
46
12
Athletic Club
38
13
6
19
43
58
-15
45
13
Elche
38
10
13
15
49
57
-8
43
14
Alaves
38
11
10
17
44
56
-12
43
15
Sevilla
38
12
7
19
46
60
-14
43
16
Osasuna
38
11
9
18
44
50
-6
42
17
Mallorca
38
11
9
18
47
57
-10
42
Match Momentum — when they create and concede danger
The question
Across a whole game, which periods does Alaves 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)
Vision AI Model Insight
Alaves tend to fade after a strong start — first-half net xG +2.51, second-half -0.61. Their strongest period is 0-15' (net +1.91 xG); their most dangerous period to face is 76-90+' (net -1.50 xG against them).
xG Race — the season, match by match
Expected goals piling up over 38 matches: Alaves 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 (+1.9 xG). Hover a point for that match.
AlavesOpponents against Alaves
Tactical DNA
The football question
In five genes, what is Alaves'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.
35
Build-Up
possession control from the back
60
Progression
moving the ball upfield with threat
33
Creation
manufacturing chances
55
Press
winning the ball high & hard
75
Solidity
resisting the opponent's threat
Genetic identity
Alaves are defined most by their Solidity DNA (75/100 · strong at resisting the opponent's threat), and least by their Creation DNA (33/100). Percentiles vs the 20 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).
Possess
Deep buildup
4%
Possession
26%
Field tilt
52%
Disrupt
Central progression ~proxy
35%
Dribble tendency
91%
Progressive passes
70%
Finish
Final-third patience
22%
Shot quality
22%
Open-play xG
39%
Press
Forward press ~proxy
74%
High regains
61%
Pressing efficiency ~proxy
61%
Defend
Def-mid press ~proxy
65%
High line ~proxy
70%
PAdj defensive actions
74%
Alaves is defined most by Defend (70% in the league) and weakest on Possess (28%). 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.
How much of the pitch does Alaves actually control, relative to the rest of the league?
Field tilt = share of final-third touches between the two sides across Alaves'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; Alaves highlighted. Hover any dot for the team.
Vision AI Model Insight
Alaves post 48% field tilt, ranking #11 of 20 in the league — below the league mid-point, spending more of the game defending their own territory than dictating it, and their 1.13 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 Alaves has the ball, how much of that time is spent building, progressing and creating?
The share of Alaves'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.
Phase
Share of the time
Build-up
20.8%
Progression
50.9%
Chance creation
26.2%
Attacking transition
2.2%
Vision AI Model Insight
Progression is where Alaves spends most of its time on the ball (51% 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.
width = passes between the paircolour = xT per pass: low → high
Top 10 combinations
Jonny ↔ Blanco
487p · 13.5xT
Jonny ↔ Tenaglia
442p · 11.1xT
Jonny ↔ Ibáñez
316p · 12.7xT
Tenaglia ↔ Blanco
281p · 9.0xT
Tenaglia ↔ Pacheco
259p · 2.6xT
Aleñá ↔ Blanco
241p · 8.5xT
Jonny ↔ Vicente
239p · 15.3xT
Suárez ↔ Blanco
226p · 6.2xT
Pacheco ↔ Blanco
198p · 5.3xT
Blanco ↔ Ibáñez
191p · 6.2xT
Vision AI Model Insight
Busiest connection: Jonny ↔ Antonio Blanco (487 passes). Most dangerous per pass: Antonio Blanco ↔ Carlos Vicente (0.08 xT/pass over 119 passes) — the combination that hurts opponents most when it fires, not just the one used most.
Touch Density — where Alaves had the ball
Every touch across 380 matches. Brighter means more touches.
Which Zones Do They Attack Through?
The question
Across the whole pitch, where does Alaves 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
17003
ACTIONS
Carries
the ball moved with a player
3296
ACTIONS
Vision AI Model Insight
Their single busiest zone is the right wing of the middle third (12.2% of all actions). 57% of actions run through the inside lanes (centre + both half-spaces) versus 43% down the two wings — an inside-dominant, half-space build. By third: 26% defensive, 52% middle, 22% 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. Alaves leaned on their right (46%). The bars under the pitch put the league’s share beside theirs.
Alaves
33%21%46%
League
39%22%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. Alaves made 1438 this season (37.8 a match); 36% came into the right wing. Longer, bolder arrows mean more entries. Entries by carrying the ball in count as well as completed passes; dribbles are not counted.
Channel
Entries
Per match
Share
League share
Left wing
364
9.6
25%
30%
Left half-space
184
4.8
13%
15%
Centre
149
3.9
10%
12%
Right half-space
222
5.8
15%
14%
Right wing
519
13.7
36%
29%
Build-up2 sections
Build-Up — the pass map
The football question
How does Alaves 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.
4488build-up passes attempted
73%completed
35%reach the middle third
4%go long into the final third
Pass types
1168CB · 35%
359Long Wide · 11%
89Long Central · 3%
1346Wide → FB · 41%
335Central · 10%
Sequence success — build-up
1160build-up sequences this season
8%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
45%turned over with nothing to show
CB1168 · 35%
Long Wide359 · 11%
Long Central89 · 3%
Wide → FB1346 · 41%
Central335 · 10%
◆ Vision AI Insight
Alaves build predominantly down the right, with Sivera as the fulcrum (630 build-up passes). Only 39% 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 C def → LHS def (187×).
Pass Explorer
Every pass of Alaves’s last 10 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.
From channel
To channel
From third
To third
Outcome
Minutes
Channel to channel · click a cell
Third to third · click a cell
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. 1709 progressive passes across 38 matches (45.0/game).
Origin lane
Right wing
35%
Right half-space
12%
Central
19%
Left half-space
10%
Left wing
24%
Progression is right-dominant: 47% right side · 19% central · 34% left.
Who generates it
Antonio Sivera
319 · 19%
Jonny
165 · 10%
Youssef Enríquez
121 · 7%
Antonio Blanco
116 · 7%
Nahuel Tenaglia
113 · 7%
Top two — Antonio Sivera & Jonny — account for 28% of all progression.
PROGRESSION
45.0 prog passes/game
mostly right
→
PENETRATION
27% reach final third
17% reach the box
→
THREAT
the other 73% is recycled
progress ≠ danger
What came of it.27% of progressive passes reached the final third and 17% the box; the rest was recycled in front of the block. 28% of the progression ran through two players, mostly down the right 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 wingbalanced
Right half-spacebalanced
Centralbalanced
Left half-spacebalanced
Left wingbalanced
Progression — the pass map
The football question
Once Alaves 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.
8681progression passes attempted
85%completed
14%break into the final third
11%go backward into the defensive third
Pass types
1846CB · 25%
248Long Wide · 3%
49Long Central · 1%
4180Wide → FB · 57%
1022Central · 14%
Sequence success — progression
1995progression sequences this season
25%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
40%turned over with nothing to show
CB1846 · 25%
Long Wide248 · 3%
Long Central49 · 1%
Wide → FB4180 · 57%
Central1022 · 14%
◆ Vision AI Insight
Alaves progress predominantly down the left, with Blanco the busiest midfield outlet (1146 progression passes). Only 14% of passes that start in midfield actually break the final-third line — the rest (74%) 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 RHS mid → RW mid (442×) — 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)
14%
Progressive
1%
Neutral / sideways
50%
Safe / backward
35%
15% of passes are progressive-or-better; the remaining 85% keep possession without advancing it. A control-first side — safe in build-up, reliant on a few players for the incision.
Where does Alaves actually progress the ball with their feet, not a pass?
827 progressive carries this season across the whole squad (25% of 3296 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 51m. Most active carrier: Jonny (122). Filter to one player below.
First (266)Second (219)Third (199)Fourth (143)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 Alaves'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.
463shots
46.5xG
0.10xG per shot
22big chances (0.3+ xG)
41goals
#12key passes / game in the league
#18box entries / game in the league
Kind of attack, then how the shot was set up
Shots
Goals
xG
xG / shot
Attacking transition26% of shots
119
7
9.94
0.08
Cross
12
1
1.53
0.13
Cut-back
9
1
1.09
0.12
Long ball
6
1
0.66
0.11
Pass into the box / short pass
44
2
3.30
0.07
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)
48
2
3.37
0.07
Settled attack53% of shots
246
18
23.42
0.10
Cross
62
4
6.59
0.11
Cut-back
23
4
3.29
0.14
Long ball
6
1
0.57
0.09
Pass into the box / short pass
95
5
7.45
0.08
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)
60
4
5.53
0.09
Set piece21% of shots
98
16
13.18
0.13
Corner
81
8
7.38
0.09
Free kick
10
1
0.24
0.02
Penalty
7
7
5.56
0.79
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
Player
Set-ups
xG created
Goals
Abde Rebbach
21
2.84
3
Carlos Vicente
18
2.44
0
Youssef Enríquez
16
2.32
1
Toni Martínez
19
2.05
2
Ángel Pérez
21
1.99
3
Who takes them
Player
Shots
xG
Goals
Toni Martínez
93
10.47
14
Lucas Boyé
63
9.23
11
Pablo Ibáñez
47
4.19
1
Carlos Vicente
12
3.43
5
Carles Aleñá
30
2.53
0
Vision AI Model Insight
The biggest source of Alaves's chances, by xG, is settled attack (23.4 of 46.5 xG, 246 of 463 shots), mostly pass into the box / short pass. 119 of the 463 shots (26%) came within 15 seconds of winning the ball. 98 of the 463 shots came from set pieces; 41 goals from 46.5 xG (-5.5).
Chance Creation — the pass map
The football question
How does Alaves 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
24CB · 8%
11Long Wide · 4%
34Long Central · 11%
81Wide → FB · 27%
153Central · 50%
Sequence success — final-third
1202final-third sequences this season
19%succeed — produce a shot
40%turned over with nothing to show
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
CB24 · 8%
Long Wide11 · 4%
Long Central34 · 11%
Wide → FB81 · 27%
Central153 · 50%
Who creates — volume × threat
37Aleñá
30Rebbach
24Vicente
23Pérez
22Boyé
21Suárez
21Blanco
303key passes #12 of 20
10.1box entries/game #18 of 20
31.0final-3rd entries/game #12 of 20
1.22xG/game #12 of 20
41goals #13 of 20
-5.5finishing vs xG #15 of 20
◆ Vision AI Insight
Alaves lean right — 48% of their key passes come from that flank and its half-space (145 of 303), most often from Vicente (23). They funnel chances into the c of the final third, most often via RW att → C att (57 key passes, most often from Vicente). Aleñá is the primary source overall. They generate 1.22 xG a game and finish it wasteful — they under-perform their xG, led by Toni Martínez (14G), Lucas Boyé (11G), Carlos Vicente (5G).
Crosses & Cutbacks — squad-wide
The question
How does Alaves deliver into the box from wide areas, and what comes of it?
514 crosses: 170 found a team-mate (33%), 72 led to a shot (14%). 100 cut-backs: 42 found a team-mate (42%), 34 led to a shot (34%). 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 Alaves actually cross from?
514 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. 31% come from one territory, the byline right wing; 21 come from the half-spaces and 0 from the centre.
Territory
Crosses
Share
Led to a shot
byline · right wing
157
31%
25
advanced · right wing
106
21%
18
byline · left wing
88
17%
14
advanced · left wing
84
16%
6
deep · right wing
34
7%
2
deep · left wing
24
5%
0
byline · right half-space
9
2%
1
advanced · right half-space
6
1%
1
advanced · left half-space
3
1%
2
deep · left half-space
2
0%
2
byline · left half-space
1
0%
1
Finishing3 sections
Shot Map
463 shots for 46.5 xG (1.22/game, #12 in the league). Click an area of the box to see who shoots from there; filter by outcome, player or match.
Moderate attack. 12.2 shots/game at 0.101 xG/shot. Box entries 10/game (#18). Threat created 10.3 xT/game (#10).
Goal Sequences
The move behind each of Alaves’s 44 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 — 44 goals traced.
How Do They Score?
The question
Where do the goals actually come from — open play, dead balls, which foot?
Every goal Alaves scored across the loaded matches, broken down by how it was created and finished.
By situation
Open play
25 · 61%
Set pieces
9 · 22%
Penalties
7 · 17%
By finish
Right foot
28 · 68%
Left foot
6 · 15%
Header
6 · 15%
Other
1 · 2%
Vision AI Model Insight
41 goals scored. 61% come in open play; set pieces add 22%. 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
How they lose it
Incomplete pass — attacking third
1186
Failed forward pass
792
Failed take-on
421
Lost in the defensive third
1191
Their weakest zone is the left wing in the defensive third: 32% of 650 pass attempts there are lost (210 times). Separately, 32% 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.
How hard does Alaves 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.
56
Pressing Index /100 · average
Intensity67
PPDA, high-press share, high-zone actions
Height65
how high up the pitch they defend
Effectiveness55
high recoveries & high-regain share
Disruption35
opponent completion & progression allowed
Every defensive action & where it happens
Where they win the ball back — by lane
RW
22%
RHS
22%
C
20%
LHS
21%
LW
16%
By third (high / mid / low regain)
Def 50%
Mid 38%
Att 12%
Read
Ranked #7 of 20 for press intensity, this is a high press. Note the tension: 50% of their raw defensive actions still occur in their own third — a possession effect, not a passive one. Dominating the ball (20% high-press share) means that when they do defend, it is often deep. Of recoveries, 53% are won high up the pitch.
Every pressing metric, ranked in the league
metric
value
rank
meaning
PPDA (opp passes per def action)
—
#7/20
lower = more intense; rank is what matters
Defensive actions / game
141
#2/20
High-press share
20%
#9/20
def actions won high up
Defensive-action height (0–100)
37.3
#7/20
avg pitch height of actions
High recoveries / game
22.2
#7/20
ball won in mid+att third
High-recovery share
53%
#11/20
share of recoveries won high
Opponent completion allowed
81%
#8/20
lower = more disruptive
Opponent progressive allowed
10.1%
#18/20
of 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 Alaves win it back with a defensive action?
Counted over the 1276 opposition possessions that Alaves 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 Alaves step in. Alaves win it after 5.4 opponent passes in the first half-hour and after 3.7 after the hour mark (sooner).
PASSES THEY GET
4.7passes
median 3 · before Alaves win it
TIME THEY KEEP IT
14sec
median 7s · 33.6 wins per game
How many passes the opponent got in before the ball was won
45%
28%
14%
13%
0–2 passes3–5 passes6–9 passes10+ passes
Through the match — every 15 minutes
0–15′
5.6
16s
15–30′
5.1
16s
30–45+′
5.6
18s
45–60′
4.5
13s
60–75′
4.4
13s
75–90+′
3.3
10s
average passesaverage seconds
Phases of play
Every moment of the match read twice — what Alaves were doing with the
ball, and what the opposition were doing about it at that exact moment. Built from the
real action sequence in time order, so one possession is split across the phases it
genuinely passed through rather than labelled once by where it began.
6,913phase segments analysed
6.0smedian time before the opposition engage
2.0their passes per defensive action when pressed
#9of 20 for share of defending spent pressing high
High press 7.7%Mid block 10.7%Low block 52.1%Unopposed 29.5%
What opponents do against Alaves
The mirror image, and the part no other section can show: whether teams come
out to press Alaves or sit in and invite them on. A side that is always faced with a low
block is playing a different sport from one that is pressed every week.
High press 10.6%Mid block 13.1%Low block 50.0%Unopposed 26.3%
Which phases actually produce
Phase
Segments
Avg length
Avg actions
Ends in shot
Turned over
Build-up
2,307
3.3s
2.3
0.1%
51.7%
Progression
2,868
6.6s
3.9
0.7%
49.8%
Chance creation
1,621
6.0s
3.3
25.8%
54.7%
Attacking transition
117
6.8s
4.3
5.1%
43.6%
Most common routes through the phases
How a possession actually travelled, in order. The chain is the tactical signature — a move that climbs all three thirds is a different thing from one that never leaves the first.
Route
Times
Ends in shot
build_up
959
0.1%
progression
769
0.8%
build_up → progression
417
0.2%
chance_creation
394
36.5%
progression → chance_creation
383
29.0%
build_up → progression → chance_creation
175
25.7%
Attitude in each third
Every other style number here says how much Alaves 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 Alaves 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) 4,488 passes
attacking the next line, more direct
Width of use+0.6522.34
Wide-channel share+0.310.32
Side bias-0.47-1.60
Pass length+0.7425.37
Long-ball share+0.940.32
Forward gain per pass+1.0215.87
Backward-pass share-0.690.17
Deep-pass share+0.780.36
Completion-0.790.73
Seconds between passes+0.073.37
Side used
left 28% · central 41% · right 31%
Progression (middle third) 8,681 passes
nothing unusual in this zone
Width of use+0.5526.73
Wide-channel share+0.630.45
Side bias-0.73-2.84
Pass length-0.5916.40
Long-ball share-0.170.09
Forward gain per pass-0.153.38
Backward-pass share+0.010.33
Deep-pass share-0.250.15
Completion-0.140.83
Seconds between passes-0.333.05
Side used
left 33% · central 27% · right 40%
Final third 3,834 passes
right-sided
Width of use+0.7533.46
Wide-channel share+0.780.65
Side bias-1.19-8.84
Pass length-0.3314.96
Long-ball share-0.250.09
Forward gain per pass+0.151.24
Backward-pass share-0.280.37
Deep-pass share-0.020.09
Completion-0.140.69
Seconds between passes-0.323.16
Side used
left 32% · central 13% · right 55%
Reference measured across roughly 3,500 match-teams
in this competition, per third, so the comparison is with Alaves'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 Alaves 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 share19%
#5 of 20 · reaches final third in ≤3 passes
Patient build-up share23%
#18 of 20 · spells of 6+ passes
Tempo (possession length)15.7s
#3 of 20 · shorter = faster tempo
Passes per possession4.0
#18 of 20
Counter-attack shots /game1.00
#9 of 20 · shot within 12s of a regain in own half
Press→shot /game3.58
#4 of 20 · shot within 8s of a high regain
Speed to final third after regain11.4s
#4 of 20 · lower = faster break
Sequence success — attacking transition
127attacking transition sequences this season
17%succeed — produce a shot
54%turned over with nothing to show
Sequence success — defensive transition
370defensive transition sequences this season
60%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
11%turned over with nothing to show
Vision AI Model Insight
Alaves are a direct, fast-break side: 19% of possessions reach the final third in 3 passes or fewer (#5 of 20), against 23% built patiently over 6+ passes (#18 of 20). Winning the ball back leads to a shot inside 12 seconds 1.00 times a game (#9), and a high regain converts to a shot within 8 seconds 3.58 times a game (#4 of 20) — a genuine transition weapon.
Defending the box2 sections
Vulnerability Map — how opponents hurt them
The report flipped: where do opponents create their threat against Alaves? 1868 opponent progressive passes and 473 shots faced (44.6 xG against) across the season.
Opponent threat by lane (attacking into Alaves)
Right wing
29%
Right half-space
13%
Central
18%
Left half-space
13%
Left wing
27%
Where the danger came from. Opponents generated most of their threat through the right wing (29% of the danger conceded).
How Do They Concede?
The question
Where do the goals against Alaves actually come from — open play, dead balls, and who supplies them?
Every goal Alaves conceded across the loaded matches — the opponent's shots in Alaves'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
Every opponent key pass against them (335 total)
By situation
Open play
48 · 87%
Set pieces
2 · 4%
Penalties
5 · 9%
Vision AI Model Insight
55 goals conceded. 87% come in open play; set pieces account for only 4%, so dead-ball defending is not the main issue. 13% are headers — aerial defending is not where the damage comes from. Their supply line runs mainly through the left wing of the attacking third (18% of key passes faced) — that is the zone to shut off.
Context
Shape and tactics
Set pieces, strengths and weaknesses, and who they resemble.
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.
How much of the goal threat is manufactured from dead balls — a route to goal that bypasses their open-play mechanism entirely.
Open play
25 g · 33.4 xG
Set pieces
9 g · 7.6 xG
Penalties
7 g
22% of goals come from set pieces (9 of 41), worth 7.6 xG from 91 shots. Set pieces are a secondary threat; the danger is in open play.
Where do Alaves's corners go?
192 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 (125)
Delivered into the box 96%Short 4%
Left side (67)
Delivered into the box 94%Short 6%
Where opponents attack Alaves from set pieces
92 shots from opponent corners against Alaves, 2 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 (45)
Shot 45Goals 1
Left flag (47)
Shot 47Goals 1
Tactical Strengths & Weaknesses
Strengths (top-third vs league)
xG conceded /game — 1.17 (75th pct)
progression /game — 44.97 (70th pct)
press intensity (PPDA) — 6.02 (65th pct)
Weaknesses (bottom-third vs league)
box entries /game — 10.13 (10th pct)
pass retention % — 78.16 (25th 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.
Getafe
83%
Rayo Vallecano
70%
Valencia
65%
Sevilla
40%
Athletic Club
33%
Performance vs Opponent Styles
The question
Not just how Alaves 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 Alaves's own passing behaviour to the result.
Results
opponent type
goals for/g
goals against/g
points/g
vs high-pressing opponents (12m)
1.08
1.33
1.33
vs mid-block opponents (12m)
1.00
1.58
0.92
vs low-block opponents (14m)
1.36
1.50
1.14
Behaviour — how Alaves actually play against each
opponent type
retention
directness (long balls)
prog. passes/g
xT/g
box entries/g
vs high-pressing opponents
73%
19%
42
9.4
8.8
vs mid-block opponents
78%
16%
43
9.8
10.1
vs low-block opponents
81%
12%
49
11.4
11.4
Vision AI Model Insight
Facing a high press, retention drops to 73% vs 81% against a low block (8pt lower under pressure), and directness (long-ball share) sits at 19% 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. Alaves are balanced-territory with a aggressive high-press.
Their attack creates 1.22 xG a game and they concede 1.17 a game.
[Event-data based — no tracking, so off-ball structure and marking scheme need video.]
For each of ten match numbers, the one match this season that departed furthest from Alaves’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.
Alaves
across 38 matches this season
Pass accuracyvs Barcelona · 1-0 · 2026-05-1358%avg 77%
Threat from passingvs Levante · 2-1 · 2025-08-169.18avg 5.78
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 Alaves’s last 12 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).
+21.5on-ball value, 12 matches
Where the value came from
Passes4653 actions+7.65
Carries954 actions-0.20
Dribbles177 actions-0.02
Shots150 actions+10.01
Ball wins675 actions+4.05
Most on-ball value (OBV)
Actions
OBV
per 100
Toni Martínez
399
+4.63
+1.16
Ángel Pérez
757
+2.93
+0.39
Lucas Boyé
184
+2.25
+1.22
Antonio Sivera
436
+2.15
+0.49
Nahuel Tenaglia
606
+1.40
+0.23
Antonio Blanco
711
+1.38
+0.19
Jonny
678
+1.22
+0.18
Abde Rebbach
446
+1.01
+0.23
Biggest single moves
OBV
1 Lucas Boyé · shot
+0.828
2 Lucas Boyé · shot
+0.803
3 Toni Martínez · shot
+0.780
4 Toni Martínez · shot
+0.630
5 Abde Rebbach · pass
+0.576
6 Antonio Blanco · pass
+0.409
Set Pieces by Player
Who delivers Alaves’s dead balls and who finishes them this season. 192 corners taken, most by Carles Aleñá (71); 91 shots from corners and free kicks, 9 goals, led by Toni Martínez (3 goals, 1.04 xG). “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.
Player
Corners taken
Into the box
Set-piece shots
Goals
xG
Free-kick shots
Penalties
Carles Aleñá
71
58 (82%)
1
—
0.03
—
—
Abde Rebbach
50
47 (94%)
4
—
0.20
1
—
Lucas Boyé
—
—
14
2
1.29
7
3/3
Carlos Vicente
33
30 (91%)
—
—
0.00
—
3/3
Toni Martínez
—
—
12
3
1.04
2
1/1
Pablo Ibáñez
1
0 (0%)
11
1
1.44
—
—
Antonio Blanco
—
—
10
—
0.48
—
—
Nahuel Tenaglia
—
—
10
1
0.68
—
—
Denis Suárez
24
18 (75%)
—
—
0.00
—
—
Facundo Garcés
—
—
5
—
0.25
—
—
Victor Parada
—
—
5
—
0.73
—
—
Youssef Enríquez
—
—
4
—
0.12
—
—
Ángel Pérez
7
7 (100%)
1
—
0.02
—
—
Jonny
—
—
3
—
0.07
—
—
Top Performers
Ranked by Vision AI Score — the same tactical behavioural evaluation each player's own report page shows (min 300 minutes). Coloured chips are that player's strongest capability blocks.
Chance creation leaders — key passes /90 and box entries.
player
pos
min
key P /90
box entries
xT
Carles Aleñá
M
2083
1.60
53
23.2
Abde Rebbach
M
1633
1.65
40
17.8
Carlos Vicente
M
1354
1.60
35
14.2
Ángel Pérez
M
1373
1.51
35
16.8
Youssef Enríquez
D
1455
0.99
36
22.2
Denis Suárez
M
1517
1.25
24
18.7
Antonio Blanco
M
3297
0.57
21
34.9
Toni Martínez
F
2825
0.61
21
8.1
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.
player
pos
min
crosses (completed)
cutbacks (completed)
Youssef Enríquez
FB
1455
28 (43%)
14 (36%)
Carlos Vicente
W
1354
20 (30%)
21 (29%)
Abde Rebbach
W
1633
22 (27%)
17 (41%)
Ángel Pérez
W
1373
16 (38%)
23 (52%)
Jonny
FB
3198
24 (25%)
9 (33%)
Calebe
W
789
9 (44%)
6 (50%)
Defensive Volume Leaders
Who does the defensive work — tackles, interceptions, recoveries.
player
pos
min
def actions
tackles
intercept
recoveries
Antonio Blanco
M
3297
570
93
54
206
Nahuel Tenaglia
D
3467
541
66
46
116
Toni Martínez
F
2825
488
28
4
85
Jonny
D
3198
458
66
41
156
Pablo Ibáñez
M
2326
341
58
21
125
Jon Pacheco
D
1856
308
36
11
70
Victor Parada
D
2319
285
33
11
64
Lucas Boyé
F
2107
268
36
7
64
Full Squad Data
Every player with 100+ minutes (25 players).
player
pos
apps
min
goals
xG
key P
prog
def
xT
Antonio Sivera
G
38
3668
0
0.0
0
319
83
59.8
Nahuel Tenaglia
D
36
3467
2
1.7
6
113
541
30.0
Antonio Blanco
M
36
3297
2
1.8
21
116
570
34.9
Jonny
D
34
3198
0
0.5
16
165
458
45.2
Toni Martínez
F
37
2825
14
10.5
19
28
488
8.1
Pablo Ibáñez
M
37
2326
1
4.2
18
40
341
16.1
Victor Parada
D
30
2319
0
1.2
11
93
285
20.0
Lucas Boyé
F
29
2107
11
9.2
22
24
268
6.1
Carles Aleñá
M
34
2083
0
2.5
37
97
231
23.2
Jon Pacheco
D
22
1856
0
0.3
3
73
308
20.4
Abde Rebbach
M
30
1633
1
2.5
30
82
220
17.8
Denis Suárez
M
30
1517
1
0.8
21
74
186
18.7
Youssef Enríquez
D
25
1455
0
0.8
16
121
178
22.2
Ángel Pérez
M
16
1373
1
1.1
23
111
156
16.8
Carlos Vicente
M
21
1354
5
3.4
24
76
174
14.2
Jon Guridi
M
28
1325
0
1.4
9
32
197
6.9
Facundo Garcés
D
10
870
0
0.4
0
15
163
5.4
Ander Guevara
M
25
828
1
0.4
5
36
136
8.8
Calebe
M
19
789
0
0.2
12
61
108
7.9
Ibrahim Diabate
F
10
601
2
1.8
2
4
65
0.8
Carlos Protesoni
D
13
381
0
0.3
3
9
51
3.1
Mariano Díaz
F
10
347
0
0.4
2
1
48
0.5
Ville Koski
D
5
308
0
0.0
1
5
44
0.9
Moussa Diarra
D
3
216
0
0.0
1
14
40
2.0
Aitor Mañas
F
9
173
0
0.6
1
0
21
0.1
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.
Antonio Sivera
Goalkeeper · Goalkeeper
minutes3668
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /907.8
key passes /900.00
def actions /902.0
pass accuracy55%
Nahuel Tenaglia
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes3467
goals · xG2 · 1.7
prog passes /902.9
key passes /900.16
def actions /9014.0
pass accuracy85%
Antonio Blanco
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes3297
goals · xG2 · 1.8
prog passes /903.2
key passes /900.57
def actions /9015.6
pass accuracy85%
Jonny
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes3198
goals · xG0 · 0.5
prog passes /904.6
key passes /900.45
def actions /9012.9
pass accuracy86%
Toni Martínez
Poacher / finisher · Forward
minutes2825
goals · xG14 · 10.5
prog passes /900.9
key passes /900.61
def actions /9015.5
pass accuracy58%
Pablo Ibáñez
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes2326
goals · xG1 · 4.2
prog passes /901.5
key passes /900.70
def actions /9013.2
pass accuracy84%
Victor Parada
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes2319
goals · xG0 · 1.2
prog passes /903.6
key passes /900.43
def actions /9011.1
pass accuracy80%
Lucas Boyé
Poacher / finisher · Forward
minutes2107
goals · xG11 · 9.2
prog passes /901.0
key passes /900.94
def actions /9011.4
pass accuracy72%
Carles Aleñá
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes2083
goals · xG0 · 2.5
prog passes /904.2
key passes /901.60
def actions /9010.0
pass accuracy79%
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: box entries /game (10th pct)
Sign a penetrative wide player or runner to create box entries. The data flags this because few entries into the box (10.13, 10th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: pass retention % (25th pct)
Sign a secure ball-retaining midfielder. The data flags this because possession is turned over cheaply (78.16, 25th percentile vs the league).
Need — below-average: xG created /game (40th pct)
Sign a higher-volume goalscorer or chance creator. The data flags this because the attack under-produces xG (1.22, 40th percentile vs the league).