Player 126 stood out based on the analysis. He had strong defensive and offensive actions, good dueling abilities, a high number of interceptions, excellent creativity metrics like assists and xA, many passes into dangerous areas, and a good non-penalty goals value. Player 124 also showed well-rounded abilities but had slightly lower assist values and danger zone passes. Player 132 had strong offensive abilities but weaker defensive contributions in areas like actions and interceptions.

1. Data Task – Part II

2. VS
Emam Ashour
Morten Thorsby

3. SIMILARITIES
Metric Thorsby Ashour
Goals 3 4
xG 3.98 3.07
Duels per 90 29.21 22.92
Duels won, % 43.58 49.25
Successful defensive actions per
90 7.97 9.03
Defensive duels per 90 7.19 6.16
Defensive duels won, % 52.61 60.25
Interceptions per 90 3.52 4.17
PAdj Interceptions 4.22 5.87
Non-penalty goals per 90 0.09 0.15
xG per 90 0.11 0.12
Touches in box per 90 1.5 1.88
Accurate passes, % 79.88 83.02
Accurate forward passes, % 67.19 72.54
Accurate passes to final third, % 70 72.27
The two players share similarities, but it is
important to note the contrasting levels of
their previous teams (Seria A vs Egyptian
Premier League) and the difference in their
performance within these teams. Zamalek,
being a top team, and Sampdoria, a mid-
lower table team in a larger and more
competitive league, exemplify this
distinction.
• They scored a similar amount of goals
with similar xG values.
• They had a similar amount of duels and
succession rates.
• They had similar successful defensive
actions and defensive duels.
• Similar values for interceptions and PAdj
Interceptions.
• Similar non-penalty xG values.
• Similar value for touches inside the box.
• Similar accuracy rates in passing.

4. DIFFERENCES
Metric Thorsby Ashour
Aerial duels per 90 9.61 2.79
Fouls per 90 2.37 0.92
Successful attacking actions per 90 0.61 4.29
Shots per 90 0.69 2.98
Assists per 90 0.03 0.15
Dribbles per 90 0.84 5.47
Successful dribbles, % 37.93 50.35
Offensive duels per 90 5.66 11.17
Offensive duels won, % 33.16 40.75
Progressive runs per 90 0.38 1.91
Accelerations per 90 0.14 0.8
Received passes per 90 14.14 33.52
Passes per 90 23.81 44.16
The two players share differences as well,
but again, it is important to note the
contrasting levels of their previous and the
difference in their performance within
these teams.
• Thorsby dominates aerial duels; Ashour
lags behind.
• Thorsby commits more than double the
fouls compared to Ashour.
• Ashour excels in the attack: more
actions, shots, assists, dribbles, and
offensive duels.
• Ashour progresses the ball with more
runs than Thorsby.
• Thorsby receives fewer passes,
potentially due to team style.
• Thorsby makes fewer passes per 90
minutes.

5. DIFFERENCES
Metric Thorsby Ashour
Forward passes per 90 7.3 14.77
xA per 90 0.03 0.08
Shot assists per 90 0.35 0.99
Smart passes per 90 0.17 0.73
Accurate smart passes, % 33.33 47.37
Key passes per 90 0.09 0.38
Passes to final third per 90 2.6 9.11
Passes to penalty area per 90 0.58 2.41
Through passes per 90 0.29 1.22
Progressive passes per 90 2.97 6.77
Accurate progressive passes, % 52.43 83.62
• Thorsby's forward passes are limited,
possibly influenced by his team's
playstyle.
• Ashour excels in xA per 90 minutes,
showcasing his playmaking abilities.
• Ashour consistently delivers a higher
number of shot assists per 90 minutes,
benefiting his teammates' scoring
opportunities.
• Ashour demonstrates a greater aptitude
for accurate and intelligent passing.
• Ashour stands out with his significantly
higher numbers of key passes, passes into
the final third, passes to the penalty area,
through passes, and progressive passes
per 90 minutes, underscoring his creative
prowess.

6. The research will be conducted using scatter plots, plotting the selected variables and the
axes created from the metrics and values mentioned below. Based on the above assumptions
and what FCM liked about Thorsby and Ashour, the research for the top 3 candidates will be
based on the following:
• Duels ~ 20
• Successful Defensive actions ~ 8
• Interceptions ~ 4
• Padj Interceptions ~ 5
• NPxG ~ 0.10
• Passing accuracy ~ 80%
• Aerial duels ~ 5
• Successful attacking actions ~ 3
• Assists ~ 0.10
• xA ~ 0.05
• Offensive duels ~ 8
• Shot assists ~ 0.6
• Key passes ~ 0.25
• Passes to final third ~ 6
• Passes to penalty area ~ 2
• Progressive passes ~ 4

7. ACTIONS
High defensive actions.
High offensive actions.
High defensive actions.
Low offensive actions.
Low defensive actions.
Low offensive actions.
Low defensive actions.
High offensive actions.
Using this plot, I aim to find the best players that
contribute the most in both aspects of the game,
defending and attacking.
• Player 124 excels in his defensive and offensive
actions, which shows his contribution to both
aspects of the game.
• Player 126 has fewer successful defensive actions
than 124 but nearly the same successful
attacking actions.
• Player 132 has below-threshold successful
defensive actions but around the same attacking
actions as the aforementioned players.

8. DUELS
High Duels.
High Offensive Duels.
High Duels.
Low Offensive Duels.
Low Duels.
Low Offensive Duels.
Low Duels.
High Offensive Duels.
Using this plot, I aim to find the most active players
in the field, and as Ashour is very active offensively, I
give specific attention to offensive duels.
• Player 124 has the highest number of duels,
many of which are offensive.
• Player 126 has above-threshold values for both
duels and offensive duels.
• Player 132 has more offensive duels than 126,
with fewer duels.

9. INTERCEPTIONS
High Padj Interceptions.
High Interceptions.
High PAdj interceptions.
Low Interceptions.
Low PAdj Interceptions.
Low Interceptions.
Low PAdj Interceptions.
High Interceptions.
Using this plot, I aim to find the best players when it
comes to interceptions.
• Player 124 excels in his interception values.
• Player 126 has an above-threshold interception
value.
• Player 132 has very few interceptions.

10. ASSISTS
High Assists.
High xA.
High Assists.
Low xA.
Low Assists.
Low xA.
Low Assists.
High xA.
This plot shows the players with the highest
contribution in creativity, plotting their assisting and
xA values.
• Player 124 has close to threshold values for both
assists and xA.
• Player 126 excels in his xA and assists values.
• Player 132 has above-threshold values for both
metrics.

11. CREATIVITY
High Shot Assists.
High Key Passes.
High Shot Assists.
Low Key Passes.
Low Shot Assists.
Low Key Passes.
Low Shot Assists.
High Key Passes.
Using this plot, I wanted to showcase each player’s
ability to create for his teammates, as key passes
and shots assists are very important in chance
creation.
• Player 124 is close to the threshold when it
comes to creativity.
• Player 126 has the highest number of shot
assists, with a decent key passes value.
• Player 132 has just above-threshold values for
both metrics.

12. DANGER ZONE PASSES
High Final 3rd passes.
High Penalty area passes.
High Final 3rd passes.
Low Penalty area passes.
Low Final 3rd passes.
Low Penalty area passes.
Low Final 3rd passes.
High Penalty area passes.
Danger zone passes are the passes which may let to
an attack. Therefore, passes into the final third and
penalty area are more likely to create an attack.
With this method, I tried finding the players that
tend to play with higher risk.
• Player 124 makes many passes into the final third
but below threshold values for passes into the
penalty area.
• Player 126 makes a lot of passes in the final third
and penalty area.
• Player 132 has just above the threshold value for
key passes but one of the highest passes to the
final third values.

13. PASSING
High Progressive passes.
High accuracy.
High Progressive passes.
Low accuracy.
Low Progressive passes.
Low accuracy.
Low Progressive passes.
High accuracy.
This plot shows each player’s ability to pass the ball
with accuracy and with the intention of progressing
the play.
• All players have above-threshold values for both
progressive passes and high passing accuracy.

14. GOALS & AERIALS
High NPG.
High Aerials.
High NPG.
Low Aerials.
Low NPG.
Low Aerials.
Low NPG.
High Aerials.
This plot shows their ability to be a threat in the
final third and their involvement in aerial duels.
• Player 124 has a decent NPG value but below-
threshold aerials.
• Player 126 has an excellent NPG value, with a
below-threshold aerials value.
• Player 132 has a low NPG value and few aerials.

15. Player 124
Positives:
• Lots of actions, both offensively
and defensively.
• High duels and lots of them in
attack.
• Lots of interceptions.
• Above average xA.
• Just above average in creativity.
• Good progressive passes and
accuracy.
• Above average in NPG.
Negatives:
• Below average assist value.
• Average for danger zone
passes.
• Below average in aerial duels.

16. Player 126
Positives:
• Lots of actions, both offensively
and defensively.
• Just above average for duels.
• Good number of interceptions.
• High assist and xA values.
• Excellent creativity values.
• Lots of danger zone passes.
• Lots of progressive passes,
above average accuracy.
• Good NPG value.
Negatives:
• Low aerials.

17. Player 132
Positives:
• Lots of attacking actions.
• Good number of duels.
• Above average in assists.
• Above average in creativity.
• Above average in danger zone
passes.
• Excellent in passing.
Negatives:
• Below average defensive
actions.
• Low number of interceptions.
• Poor NPG values and aerials.