๐Ÿ“Š Statistiche e analisi sul Lecce - ๐Ÿ“ˆ Numeri, dati e curiositร  - ๐Ÿ’›โค๏ธ Il Lecce, in numeri - Un progetto di @coldpatrix - Facebook: https://xitter.cf/t.co/FcyQG6371l

Joined June 2026
๐Ÿ“Š ๐—Ÿ๐—˜๐—–๐—–๐—˜-๐—๐—จ๐—ฉ๐—˜ ๐Ÿฌ-๐Ÿฎ: ๐—ข๐—Ÿ๐—ง๐—ฅ๐—˜ ๐—œ๐—Ÿ ๐—ฃ๐—ข๐—ฆ๐—ฆ๐—˜๐—ฆ๐—ฆ๐—ข โšก Vertical tendency: 16,7%-19,8% ๐Ÿ›ก๏ธ PPDA: 12,5-11,7 ๐Ÿ”„ Recuperi alti: 6-3 ๐ŸŽฏ Passaggi nella metร  campo avversaria: 194-182 ๐—Ÿ๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐—ฐ๐—ฒ ๐—บ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐—ผ ๐˜ƒ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ฒ, ๐—บ๐—ฎ ๐—ฝ๐—ถ๐˜‚ฬ€ ๐—ฝ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜๐—ฒ ๐—ถ๐—ป ๐—ฎ๐˜ƒ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐˜๐—ถ
1
1
1
53
Approfondimento qui ๐Ÿ‘‡๐Ÿผ shorturl.at/cmzXg (Thanks @BeGriffis!) #LecceAnalytics #LecceStats
19
Lecce Analytics retweeted
Azioni difensive โ€” Lecce Serie A 2026. Dati aggiornati il: 26/10/26, 11:22 (UTCโˆ’3) Marcatori, assist, voti e altre statistiche sul sito: futstatto.pages.dev/
1
1
35
๐Ÿ“Š ๐—Ÿ๐—˜๐—–๐—–๐—˜-๐—๐—จ๐—ฉ๐—˜ ๐Ÿฌ-๐Ÿฎ: ๐—œ๐—Ÿ ๐—ก๐—ข๐——๐—ข ๐—ง๐—”๐—ง๐—ง๐—œ๐—–๐—ข โšฝ Possessi nel terzo offensivo: 62-43 ๐Ÿ“ Ingressi in area: 14-10 โšก Passaggi tra le linee: 13-20 ๐ŸŽฏ xG per tiro: 0,064-0,091 Il Lecce avanza, ma crea pochi squilibri. Il limite รจ nella qualitร  delle occasioni
Lecce 0โ€“2 Juventus | Three points, and the same problems underneath Juve won in Lecce, but this wasnโ€™t a good away performance. It was a side that has spent the whole season failing to build on its own control, and this time it happened to get away with it. The night itself Lecce were the better side on the ball and without it. They had 1.03 xG to 0.73, 16 shots to 8, and 14 box entries to 10. They pressed Juve properly too: 18 high regains to 7, and 8 shots from transitions against Juveโ€™s 1. Juve put two shots on target all night and both went in. McKennie scored from a set-piece move on 28', a 0.38 chance and the best opening of the match. Douglas Luiz added a 0.04 strike from distance on 40'. Lecceโ€™s 16 attempts averaged 0.064 xG each, with no clear chance among them. And this isnโ€™t new. Eight league games in: 1๏ธโƒฃ Dominance that doesnโ€™t kill games. Against Milan, Juve had 1.64 xG to 0.12 and drew 1-1. At Cagliari it was 2.26 to 0.59, with a 90% field tilt and 22 shots, and it finished 1-1 again. Four points dropped from games they owned. 2๏ธโƒฃ Conceding more than they allow. Opponents have created 5.03 xG against Juve and scored 8. Sassuolo got 3 from 1.05, Lazio got 3 from 0.66. When teams do get in, too much of it goes in. 3๏ธโƒฃ The attack has dried up. In the first six rounds Juve averaged around 1.7 xG and 18 shots a game. In the last two: 0.93 and 0.73 xG, 9 and 8 shots, two on target each time, and one big chance across both. 4๏ธโƒฃ The press has disappeared. Early on Juve were winning the ball high 20 to 34 times a game. Against Lazio it was 10, at Lecce 7, while their opponents won it back 12 and 18 times. 5๏ธโƒฃ The build-up is breaking down. Only 19.1% of their build-ups succeeded at Lecce, the lowest of the season. Their exposure when losing the ball is also climbing, at 19.0% against Lazio and 16.2% here. Fourteen points from eight games is a respectable table position. The underlying trend says the control is slipping, and that results like this one are becoming the exception rather than the rule.
1
2
3
92
Approfondimento qui ๐Ÿ‘‡๐Ÿผ shorturl.at/qtCja (Thanks @TacTical_41!) #LecceAnalytics #LecceStats
1
1
17
๐Ÿ“Š ๐—Ÿ๐—˜๐—–๐—–๐—˜-๐—๐—จ๐—ฉ๐—˜ ๐Ÿฌ-๐Ÿฎ: ๐—œ๐—Ÿ ๐—ฃ๐—”๐—ฅ๐—”๐——๐—ข๐—ฆ๐—ฆ๐—ข ๐ŸŽฏ Tiri: 16-8 ๐Ÿฅ… In porta: 5-3 ๐Ÿ“ Tiri in area: 10-6 Nella ripresa il baricentro del Lecce sale di 9 metri, quello juventino arretra di 10. ๐—ฃ๐—ถ๐˜‚ฬ€ ๐˜ƒ๐—ผ๐—น๐˜‚๐—บ๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐—ณ๐—ณ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜€๐—ถ๐˜ƒ๐—ผ, ๐—บ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐—ผ ๐—ฒ๐—ณ๐—ณ๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐—ถ๐—ฎ ๐Ÿ“ˆ Lega Serie A
๐Ÿค– Made with AI
1
1
1
80
Gli xG di Lecce-Juventus: Lecce 0,76 vs Juventus 0,80. Valori pressochรฉ in equilibrio (con Geubbels il piรน pericoloso a quota 0,23 xG) ma alla fine la spuntano gli ospiti... #LecceAnalytics #LecceStats
2
2
86
๐Ÿ›ก๏ธ ๐—ง๐—œ๐—”๐—š๐—ข ๐—š๐—”๐—•๐—ฅ๐—œ๐—˜๐—Ÿ, ๐—–๐—˜๐—ก๐—ง๐—ฅ๐—”๐—Ÿ๐—˜ ๐——๐—œ ๐—ฆ๐—ข๐—ฆ๐—ง๐—”๐—ก๐—ญ๐—”! ๐Ÿ“Š Percentili tra i difensori di Serie A: ๐Ÿฅ‡ Contrasti vinti: 96ยฐ ๐Ÿšซ Tiri bloccati: 91ยฐ ๐Ÿ’ช Duelli vinti: 89ยฐ โœˆ๏ธ Duelli aerei vinti: 80ยฐ ๐Ÿงฑ Rinvii difensivi: 84ยฐ Volume di interventi e soliditร  nei duelli!
1
2
2
117
๐Ÿ“Š ๐—ง๐—œ๐—”๐—š๐—ข ๐—š๐—”๐—•๐—ฅ๐—œ๐—˜๐—Ÿ, ๐—ง๐—ข๐—ฃ ๐Ÿฏ ๐—œ๐—ก ๐—˜๐—จ๐—ฅ๐—ข๐—ฃ๐—”! ๐Ÿฅ‰ 3ยฐ tra i centrali U21 dei top 5 campionati per Possession +/- (-1,01). Lโ€™indice misura il saldo tra possessi conquistati e persi, corretto per il possesso di squadra Davanti solo Cubarsรญ e Huijsen ๐Ÿ“ˆ @DataMB_
1
2
2
143
Approfondimento qui ๐Ÿ‘‡๐Ÿผ shorturl.at/iUNaa (Thanks @DataMB_!) #LecceAnalytics #LecceStats
11
๐Ÿ›ก๏ธ ๐—Ÿ๐—˜๐—–๐—–๐—˜, ๐—ฃ๐—ฅ๐—œ๐— ๐—”๐—ง๐—ข ๐—œ๐—ก ๐—ฆ๐—˜๐—ฅ๐—œ๐—˜ ๐—” ๐Ÿฅ‡ 89 tackle vinti ๐Ÿฅˆ Roma 86 ๐Ÿฅ‰ Frosinone 85 ๐Ÿ“Š Non semplici contrasti: sono interventi dopo i quali la squadra riconquista il possesso ๐—ก๐—ผ๐—ป ๐˜€๐—ผ๐—น๐—ผ ๐—ฎ๐—ด๐—ด๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐˜€๐—ถ๐˜ƒ๐—ถ๐˜๐—ฎฬ€, ๐—บ๐—ฎ ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐—ฝ๐—ฎ๐—ฐ๐—ถ๐˜๐—ฎฬ€ ๐—ฑ๐—ถ ๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—พ๐˜‚๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜๐—ฎ!
1
2
3
145
๐ŸŽฏ ๐—Ÿ๐—˜๐—–๐—–๐—˜, ๐—œ ๐—ฃ๐—œ๐—”๐—ญ๐—ญ๐—”๐—ง๐—œ ๐—ฆ๐—ข๐—ก๐—ข ๐—จ๐—ก'๐—”๐—ฅ๐— ๐—”! ๐Ÿฅ‡ 6 gol su 9 da palla inattiva (66,7%): nessuno in Serie A ha un'incidenza simile! ๐Ÿ“Š Il 47,9% degli xG nasce da fermo. โšฝ Difensori: 4 gol โšฝ Centrocampisti: 3 โšฝ Attaccanti: 2 Una risorsa o una dipendenza?
1
2
3
120
Approfondimento qui ๐Ÿ‘‡๐Ÿผ shorturl.at/KSApu (Thanks @Kickest_it and @FotMob!) #LecceAnalytics #LecceStats
1
17
๐Ÿ“‰ ๐—š๐—˜๐—จ๐—•๐—•๐—˜๐—Ÿ๐—ฆ: ๐—œ๐—Ÿ ๐—ฃ๐—”๐—ฅ๐—”๐——๐—ข๐—ฆ๐—ฆ๐—ข ๐——๐—˜๐—Ÿ ๐—š๐—ข๐—Ÿ โฑ๏ธ 230 minuti โšฝ 0 gol ๐ŸŽฏ 2,63 xG ๐Ÿ“‰ G-xG: -2,63 Terzo peggior saldo in Serie A. Solo Yeboah e Ramos fanno peggio, ma hanno segnato rispettivamente 1 e 2 gol ๐—Ÿ๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐—ฐ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ถ ๐—ฐ๐—ถ ๐˜€๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ผ. ๐—œ ๐—ด๐—ผ๐—น ๐—ป๐—ผ #Lecce
๐Ÿค– Made with AI
2
2
3
916