Pass difficulty
92.3%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Player profile
Senne Lynen
Werder Bremen · Center Defensive Midfield · MID
Matches observed2
Pass attempts77
Limited sampleActual completion
90.9%
70 completed passes
Pass difficulty
92.3%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.3 pp
-1.0 completions vs model expectation
Actual pass completion compared with the model's expected completion.
Player intelligence
Position profile
MID context · Each percentile is an empirical rank among eligible players in the same broad position group. Percentiles are not ratings.
Insufficient eligible position metrics for a meaningful radar.
Style
Tendencies describe what a player attempts; higher is not automatically better.
Under-pressure pass rate
26.0%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Progressive pass rate
5.2%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Long-pass rate
24.7%
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Average forward distance
-0.4 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
472.2 units
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Final-third entries / 100 passes
6.494
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Carry share of actions
41.3%
12th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 126
Progressive carry rate
0.0%
12th percentile among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 52
Progressive action rate
2.4%
3rd percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 126
Under-pressure action rate
31.0%
81st percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 126
Shots / observed match
0.00 / match
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 0
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
—
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 0
metric unavailable
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
-1.3 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 13 eligible peers · sample 77
requires 100 passes
Under-pressure completion above expected
-2.7 pp
22nd percentile among MID players
n = 10 eligible peers · sample 20
Progressive completion above expected
-18.6 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 4
requires 20 progressive passes
Long-pass completion above expected
-1.6 pp
Unavailable among MID players
n = 9 eligible peers · sample 19
requires 20 long passes
Goals above expected
0.000
Unavailable among MID players
n = 5 eligible peers · sample 0
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.032
35th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 126
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.095
49th percentile among MID players
n = 58 eligible peers · sample 74
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.058
29th percentile among MID players
n = 66 eligible peers · sample 52
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.025
22nd percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 126
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.043
67th percentile among MID players
n = 61 eligible peers · sample 126
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Safe Circulator
Position-relative style among eligible MID players.
Style separation0.104
Progressive-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty (higher)
Positive forward distance / 100 passes (lower)
Long-pass rate (lower)
Pass difficulty+1.34 z
Under-pressure pass rate+1.62 z
Progressive-pass rate-1.13 z
Long-pass rate+2.29 z
Positive forward distance / 100 passes-0.95 z
Carry share of actions-1.21 z
Bars are z-scores relative to eligible positional peers, not percentiles or ratings. Distance-based style separation, not a probability. Smaller values mean the player lies nearer the boundary between the two archetypes.
Role Fit
MID role
How closely a player's playing style matches this role. Compared with Bayer Leverkusen's observed MID role.
#36 of 39Comparable external midfield candidatesRaw distance: 1.590
Lower distance means closer stylistic resemblance.
Closest stylistic dimensions
- Forward distance per 100 passes
- Expected completion rate
- Progressive passing rate
Largest stylistic difference
Long-pass rate
limited sampleObserved across 2 matchesRole: 34 matches · 10 contributors
Role Fit compares observed playing style. It does not predict player quality, transfer success, or future performance.
Attacking impact
Impact of passes and carries
Measures how much each pass or carry changed the expected attacking value of a possession. Positive values improved the attack; negative values reduced it.
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.032
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.095
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.058
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.025
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.043
126 actions · 74 passes · 52 carries · 46.8% increased attacking value
Campos visualization
Carry value map
Exact StatsBomb carry start/end locations. Green increases modeled possession value; coral decreases it.
Situational execution
Under pressure
20 attempts
- Actual
- 90.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 92.7%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -2.7 pp
Progressive passing
4 attempts
- Actual
- 25.0%
- Pass difficulty
- 43.6%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -18.6 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Long passing
19 attempts
- Actual
- 89.5%
- Pass difficulty
- 91.1%
- Actual vs. expected passing
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
5.2%
Pressure-pass rate
26.0%
Average forward distance
-0.4 m
Positive forward distance / 100
472.2 m
Final-third entries / 100
6.5
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–77 of 77 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 99.2%
- Outcome
- Completed
- Attacking impact
- 0.0006
- Value before
- 0.0065
- Value after
- 0.0071
- Length
- 29.0 m
- Context
- Under pressure
Event clocks are not retained in the pass API.
Similar playing styles
Style similarity compares position-relative playing style across passing and carrying tendencies. Scores are not ability ratings.
100 means identical observed profiles; 50 is about the median same-position playing style match. Not a probability.
Limited sample: this player's style profile is based on 2 observed matches, so nearest-neighbor rankings may be less stable.
Style similarity
66.5 / 100
Carry Share Of ActionsExpected Completion RateProgressive Pass Rate
Sample support: Limited · 2 limiting matches
Observed: 2 vs 2 matches
Style similarity
51.7 / 100