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

A Ligue 1 center-back sitting at 50.33 on the FQ scale — a typical performer with no standout dimension separating them from the baseline. Across 25 matches (1,836 minutes), the per-90 profile is modest: 1.42 tackles, 0.54 key passes, and a 6.82 average rating. Critically, all role-specific sub-scores are null, meaning the full picture of defensive contribution remains unresolved.
The 50.33 FQ score reflects a player operating at the middle of the scale with no sub-score above baseline to pull the rating higher. The absence of a defense sub-score — the single most important dimension for a center-back — means the score is driven primarily by per-90 volume metrics, which themselves show no above-average output.
Form score of 48.1 sits 2.2 points below the FQ score of 50.33, placing this player in stable-to-marginally-soft territory — within the ±5 threshold for a stable read. This is not a temporary dip; the tight alignment between form and FQ suggests this level of output has been consistent across the sample.
Diks scores 50.48 — virtually identical to this player's 50.33 — reflecting a similar profile of mid-scale output; Diks operates as a fullback, giving him a different positional context despite the matching score.
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.
Dźwigała's 50.11 FQ score places him in the same typical-performer band; both are center-backs at the 50-point threshold, though direct sub-score comparison is limited by null data on both profiles.
Kolašinac at 50.04 rounds out a tight cluster of comparable scores; his profile carries more physical duel history as a veteran, which may differentiate the underlying drivers despite the near-identical headline number.
The defense sub-score is null, which is the core evaluation gap for this role. With only 1.42 tackles per 90 visible in the raw data, there is no confirmed picture of duel success, interceptions, or clearance volume — the metrics that define center-back value.
Progression sub-score is null and key passes sit at 0.54 per 90, offering no evidence of above-baseline ball-playing contribution — a dimension increasingly expected of modern center-backs.
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 →