Pulling current player details into TactiQ.
TactiQ Score, per-90 performance stats, and multi-season form — with direct routes into compare and rankings.

A fringe-level center back in Serie A sitting at 50.65 on the FQ scale — squarely in the typical performer band. Across 26 matches and 2,102 minutes this season, no sub-score dimension clears the 70 threshold, and the absence of granular defensive metrics means the picture is incomplete despite 84% score confidence. The most notable on-ball output is 2.18 tackles per 90, with a modest average rating of 6.88.
With all sub-scores null, the FQ Score of 50.65 is driven primarily by aggregate output signals — a 6.88 average rating and 2.18 tackles per 90 that sit around the middle of the positional range without standing out in any dimension. The absence of defensive sub-score data prevents pinpointing a specific weakness, but the overall production profile is consistent with a player who meets baseline expectations without exceeding them.
Form score of 54.98 sits 4.3 points above the FQ score of 50.65 — within the ±5 stable band, though nudging toward a mild upward trend. The risk/form agent flags this as an improving trajectory from a moderate baseline, not a breakout signal.
Nearly identical FQ score (50.48) reflects a similar level of consistent but unspectacular contribution; Diks operates primarily as a fullback rather than a central defender, giving him a different positional profile.
Top 50 players by TactiQ Score — filter by position, form, and confidence.
TactiQ Score, form, confidence, and season stats compared side by side — instantly.
Every TactiQ Score is deterministic and traceable. Read the full methodology behind the numbers.
Comparable overall score (50.11) and role bucket suggest similar mid-tier defensive output; Dźwigała's profile may differ in league context and physical duel emphasis.
Matching score band (50.04) with broadly similar defensive contribution levels; Kolašinac brings more established top-league experience, which likely shapes how that score is composed.
All sub-scores (defense, physical duel, possession control) are null, meaning key center back dimensions — duel success rate, aerial ability, positioning — cannot be individually assessed. This limits confidence in identifying where the player is weakest within the role.
0.09 goals per 90 and 0.39 key passes per 90 are minimal even by center back standards, suggesting limited involvement in build-up or set-piece threat — a secondary but real gap for a modern CB role.
A 0–100 measure of overall quality. Combines statistical output with league difficulty, multi-season weighting, and a consistency factor. Target range for strong players: 70–85.
Weighted toward recent matches. Can diverge from the TactiQ Score when current form is meaningfully stronger or weaker than the multi-season average.
How much evidence supports this score. Lower confidence means thinner data — fewer seasons, fewer appearances, or gaps in coverage. A provisional score is real signal with appropriate caveats.
TactiQ Scores are deterministic — given the same evidence, they produce the same output. The evidence packet system, confidence labels, and publication gate are all explained in full.
Read the full methodology →