The Club
Report

His output mapped directly onto the target squad: his per-90 numbers next to the club's current baseline in his position, the depth and workload already there, and where he would land in that squad's internal ranking on the metrics that define his role.

When the two sides sit in different tiers, that is the first thing the section says, and it then keeps the two profiles separate, each ranked inside its own competition, rather than inventing an adjustment factor to blend them.

The players at the target club he would genuinely compete with, compared head-to-head: output, usage, age and minutes share. This is the section a negotiation turns on, because it replaces "we already have players there" with names and numbers.

Context for the jump: his rates against the positional baselines of the target club's competition, so both sides can see the size of the step rather than argue about it.

Presented as raw-rate context with its limits stated. We never print cross-league percentiles, and we don't invent a tier-adjustment factor to make a comparison look cleaner than it is.

Head-to-head against named alternatives — the other players on the club's shortlist, or the statistical comparables we surface if there isn't one. Side-by-side profiles on one metric set, so the choice between candidates is an argument about numbers instead of reels.