Where the model has them
The model sees 1. FC Heidenheim finishing around 2nd in the 2. Bundesliga this season. The probabilities tell a clear story: 11.90% chance of the title, 55.24% chance of the top four, and a relegation risk of just 0.61%. Expected points sit at 56.7. This projection is driven by their attack and defence strength, alongside their Elo ratings. The attack strength multiplier is 1.26 (league average is 1.00, so this is stronger than average), whilst the defence multiplier is 0.95 (again, 1.00 is average, so this is stronger than average, meaning they concede fewer goals). Their attacking Elo is 1584 and defending Elo is 1547, which reflects their status as a team stepping down a level after relegation from the tier above.
In attack
Heidenheim's attack is above average, with a strength multiplier of 1.26. Budu Zivzivadze was the top goal scorer last season with 5 goals in 19 appearances, accounting for 21% of their games. Marnon Busch led the assists with 5 in 28 appearances, contributing to 14% of games. Marvin Pieringer had the highest shot volume, with 29 in 26 appearances, playing 65% of games. The top scorers in the squad were Budu Zivzivadze (5g/0a), Christian Joe Conteh (4g/3a), and Marvin Pieringer (4g/0a). The lack of a proven high-volume scorer is a noted weakness, with Zivzivadze's 5 goals being the best last season.
In defence
Defensively, Heidenheim is slightly below average with a strength multiplier of 0.95. The defensive-actions leaders include Tim Siersleben with 4.36 tackles, interceptions, and blocks per 90 minutes, Marnon Busch with 3.66 per 90, and Patrick Mainka with 3.55 per 90. This suggests a solid, if not spectacular, defensive unit. The defence multiplier indicates they are stronger than the average team in this division, which bodes well for keeping opponents at bay.
What the window changed
The transfer window saw some key moves that nudged the model's numbers. The attack multiplier moved from 1.22 to 1.26, thanks in part to the arrival of Christian Joe Conteh, who scored 4 goals last season. The departure of Stefan Schimmer, who netted 5 goals, slightly offset this gain. Defensively, the multiplier shifted from 0.97 to 0.95. Maximilian Breunig joined, contributing 12 defensive actions, whilst the exit of Niklas Dorsch had a marginal impact. These changes suggest a slight strengthening in both attack and defence.
Weaknesses and risks
The main risks to the projection centre around Heidenheim's lack of a proven high-volume scorer and the fact they were relegated into this division. The model has no record of them at this level, which introduces an element of uncertainty. The squad may yet be broken up, impacting their performance. These factors could see them underperforming relative to the model's projection.
---
Key players (last season)
| Category | Player | Total | Per game | 1+ rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goals | Budu Zivzivadze | 5 | 0.26 | 21% |
| Assists | Marnon Busch | 5 | 0.18 | 14% |
| Shots | Marvin Pieringer | 29 | 1.12 | 65% |
| Tackles won | Jonas Föhrenbach | 46 | 1.77 | 85% |
| Fouls drawn | Benedikt Gimber | 31 | 1.48 | 81% |
| Fouls committed | Benedikt Gimber | 27 | 1.29 | 71% |
Defensive-actions leaders (per 90)
| Player | Tackles+Int+Blocks /90 | Apps |
|---|---|---|
| Tim Siersleben | 4.36 | 15 |
| Marnon Busch | 3.66 | 28 |
| Patrick Mainka | 3.55 | 33 |
Transfer impact (model)
- Attack: in Christian Joe Conteh (4g), out Stefan Schimmer (5g)
- Defence: in Maximilian Breunig (12 def actions), out Niklas Dorsch
_Model profile generated from the BetSignals season simulation. Player figures are last season's totals._