TactiQ
Sign InGet Started
TactiQ
Football Intelligence
Founding Beta

TactiQ is built around Player & Club Data, Match Intelligence, Predictive Modeling, and Research & Visualization — understand the system, not the surface.

Core
Club football as the permanent base
Launch
World Cup as the launch amplifier
Transparency
Public roadmap and visible system progress
The standard
Methodology →

Every score is deterministic, evidence-gated, and confidence-labelled. Football intelligence should be explainable — not a black box with a number on the front. The methodology is part of the product, not a legal page.

Deterministic scoringMulti-agent consensus gatedPublication gate active
Core
PlayersClubsMatchesWorld Cup 2026Roadmap
Product
CompareRankingsForecastMethodologyMembership
Legal
PrivacyTerms© 2026 TactiQ. All rights reserved.
Player Profile

Loading player profile...

Pulling current player details into TactiQ.

Player Profile

Pierre Lees-Melou

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

Current Team
Paris
Position
Defensive Midfield
Also: Defensive Midfielder
Date of Birth
May 25, 1993 (32)
Jersey Number
#33
League
Ligue 1
Back to PlayersCompare PlayerOpen RankingsView Methodology
Pierre Lees-Melou
Pierre Lees-Melou
Current profile snapshot
Current Team
Paris
Position
Defensive Midfield
Also: Defensive Midfielder
Date of Birth
May 25, 1993 (32)
Jersey Number
#33
TactiQ Score
70.5
78% confidence
TactiQ Score v2
70.5
Form Score
63.5
Confidence
78%
Role
defensive_midfielder
League
Ligue 1
Per 90 minutes
Goals
0.06
Assists
0.11
Key Pass
0.61
Tackles
2.96
Rating
6.81
Multi-season trend
AI Analysis
Generated May 6, 2026

A Ligue 1 defensive midfielder sitting at 52.21 on the FQ scale — solidly in the typical performer band (50-59), with no dimension standing out above the baseline. Across 20 matches and 1,613 minutes this season, the most notable on-ball output is 2.96 tackles per 90, while goal contributions are minimal at 0.06 goals and 0.11 assists per 90. The absence of sub-score breakdowns limits granular profiling, but the overall picture is a player meeting role requirements without exceeding them.

Why this score

The FQ score of 52.21 reflects a player at the positional baseline with no sub-score above the threshold needed to pull the composite higher. All six dimension sub-scores (finishing, creation, progression, defense, possession control, physical duel) returned null, meaning no single area of the game is generating a measurable competitive edge.

Form Trajectory

Form score of 47.65 sits 4.6 points below the FQ score of 52.21 — just inside the stable range but trending toward soft decline territory. Recent performances are pulling the average down, though the drop is not yet severe enough to signal acute concern.

Similar Profiles
Players with comparable scoring profiles in the same role
Jordan Brian Henderson

Both occupy a similar FQ band (Henderson 51.48 vs 52.21) as defensive midfielders whose value is largely organisational rather than production-driven; Henderson's profile carries more career pedigree at elite level, which this player has not yet established.

Compare →
Rankings
See where this player sits across all scored players.

Top 50 players by TactiQ Score — filter by position, form, and confidence.

Open Rankings →
Compare
Put this player next to another and find the real edges.

TactiQ Score, form, confidence, and season stats compared side by side — instantly.

Compare Player →
Methodology
Understand exactly how this score was built.

Every TactiQ Score is deterministic and traceable. Read the full methodology behind the numbers.

View Methodology →
Latest available season snapshot

Live statistics currently available for this profile

10 metrics surfaced
Appearances
21
Minutes
1696
Goals
1
Assists
2
Key passes
13
Rating
6.82
Tackles
55
Shots on target
6
Successful dribbles
9
Clean sheets
4
2 Seasons Ago
TQ 75.4Form 75.5
Previous
TQ 68.7Form 68.7
Current
TQ 62.9Form 63.5
Per 90 minutes
Goals
0.06
Assists
0.11
Key Passes
0.61
Tackles
2.96
Rating
6.81
Boubacar Kamara

Kamara's FQ score of 53.46 places him in the same typical-performer tier in a defensive midfield role; Kamara's physical duel and pressing metrics have historically been more defined, whereas this player's sub-score profile remains unresolved.

Compare →
Idrissa Gana Gueye

Gueye (53.77) is a close FQ peer and shares the Ligue 1 defensive midfield context; Gueye's career has shown higher defensive action volume, making him the stronger benchmark for what the ceiling of this profile can look like.

Compare →
Current indicators
What the live season sample is surfacing right now
Defensive activity
55 tackles indicate active intervention volume in the current season sample.
Strengths
Where this player is genuinely above baseline
No clearly elite traits identified in current data.
Watchpoints
Real gaps relative to this player's role
Attacking contribution

0.06 goals and 0.11 assists per 90 are well below what even a conservative defensive midfielder is expected to contribute in Ligue 1. 0.61 key passes per 90 suggests limited involvement in build-up phases that progress to chances.

Dimension-level production

All six sub-scores are null across 20 appearances and 1,613 minutes — an unusually complete absence of standout output in any tracked dimension, including defense, which is the primary function of this role.

Reading the score

What each number means

TactiQ Score

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.

Form Score

Weighted toward recent matches. Can diverge from the TactiQ Score when current form is meaningfully stronger or weaker than the multi-season average.

Confidence

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.

Methodology

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 →