Defenders Might Be the Most Important Players in Soccer
Soccer By The Numbers has an article that's ostensibly about player salary efficiency in MLS, but for me the money info is in the three included charts that correlate team performance to the Castrol Index scores. The summary is that there's almost no correlation with forwards, pretty good correlation with midfielders, and almost a straight line with defenders, meaning that the quality of your defenders will determine the quality of your team more than anything else. Assuming you trust the Castrol Index as a player evaluation tool, of course.
3 months ago
sidereal
38 comments
3 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I really like the charts
I find the castrol index to be a bit unreliable, but I do like how this presents it as an average instead of on an individual basis. That said, the results are not surprising. It’s harder to score a goal then it is to prevent one. And, on that basis, defenders should not be paid as much. Perhaps more, but not as much as mids/strikers.
How is it harder to score a goal then to prevent one?
That makes no sense.
by DaveValleDrinkNight on Feb 13, 2012 10:06 PM PST up reply actions
Wait for it....
Figure it out?
I'm so positive, you'll need AZT later.
by Steen on Feb 13, 2012 10:34 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, there's 2.5 goals a game
Goalkeepers prevent 10-20 a game as saves, Defenders prevent 5-10 as blocks, could argue that dozens more are prevented before they even are struck towards goal by tackles. Harder to score by far.
It doesn't look very difficult for Messi or Rooney.
It sure looked pretty easy for the Spurs to score against Newcastle. Where do you get the 2.5 goals average? Is that solely for MLS, or is that an average number for every professional league in the world?
My point is that you can say it’s harder to score but just because you think that doesn’t make it so. To make that definitive of a statement I’d like to see a lot of comparative data between leagues and different teams.
by DaveValleDrinkNight on Feb 14, 2012 2:25 PM PST up reply actions
2.5 goals per game average is a commonly used average
Could apply it to any of the top 10-20 leagues in the world and it wouldn’t be far off. MLS last year was 2.585 goals per game, EPL is a bit high this year 2.852, La Liga is 2.6455 this year, Bundesliga is high at 2.8042, Serie A is at 2.5157 which might reflect their struggles in Europe and domestically, Ligue 1 is at 2.5177.
And since you made me go calculate things I calculated saves per game which my earlier estimate was a bit high on, last MLS season was 5.980 per game, which includes 14 PK saves, 83.1% conversion rate on PKs last year, still over twice as many saves as goals, and this is only one way of stopping a goal.
Haven’t seen any good block stats, might be as high as saves since I thought saves were higher.
For every 10-0 drubbing, there are three 0-0 snoozers.
Should've mentioned, this is a combined average
Last year we were at 1.647 goals for per game, and 1.0882 goals against per game, for a total of 2.7352, a bit higher than the league average, our games were more exciting, yay.
Well there you go.
I still find it frustrating that block stats really arent kept by the league. I’m sure some teams keep them but they will not share with us.
Selfish bastards.
by DaveValleDrinkNight on Feb 14, 2012 5:41 PM PST up reply actions
Blocks are noted by Opta
but not computed on a season long total
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan
The problem is it's not just shots blocked that define a good defender.
Really good defenders stop shots by being in a position that doesn’t allow the opposing player to get off a shot in the first place.
That’s what frustrates me about the whole scoring is harder argument. There are fairly good metrics to gauge offensive players but not so much on the defensive side
by DaveValleDrinkNight on Feb 15, 2012 2:32 AM PST up reply actions
Agree, positioning is yet another way to stop goals
There’s half a dozen ways to stop goals, goal stoppages are commonplace, every minute of every game practically, which is exactly why scoring goals is by far more difficult.
On set pieces the offensive team also has a distinct advantage.
by DaveValleDrinkNight on Feb 15, 2012 3:04 PM PST up reply actions
Penalties are a few times a season
And even with set pieces there are far more stoppages than goals, but yes there are fewer defenders to beat which is why it’s probably easier to score on them, haven’t done number crunching.
Still, all in all, it’s harder to score a goal than to prevent one, with exceptions, but on average, far, far, far harder, 5 times as hard, 10 times as hard, 20 times as hard maybe.
Points and Wins
For me the most telling stats were those related to NYRB. Their Forwards and MF were fairly strong, but their defense was woeful. The end result was that they lost more games than their composite Castrol Index might have predicted.
A team cannot lose if their opposition doesn’t score. They might not win, but they cannot lose. This results in points. On the flip side, a team can score 4 goals and still not win or draw. Scoring goals might be more difficult, but in and of itself it doesn’t lead to points.
I would be curious to see how the Castrol index related to games where one or both teams did not score. LA in 2011 was the master of the 1-0 win. Shut outs lead to points and the opportunity for wins.
by Abbott Smith on Feb 13, 2012 6:32 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
LA is a good example for this article. You always here about Becks/Landycakes/Keane
but I’m really interested to see how their back line holds up without their best defender for the majority of a season. Not too well I’d guess.
by DaveValleDrinkNight on Feb 13, 2012 10:17 PM PST up reply actions
Awesome findings
Now there statisitcal justification for my epic 10-0-0 formation. Hey Red Bulls call me when you turf Hans Backe!
by Dizzo on Feb 13, 2012 11:36 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
You must be a Stoke City supporter
The return of THIERRY
by Kyle Ritter on Feb 14, 2012 9:33 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Defending is hard
“It’s harder to score a goal then it is to prevent one.”
I don’t think that’s a fair statement. Sure, any given play is unlikely to result in a goal, but defending well is about preventing a goal on every play. If the offensive player succeeds one time out of ten attempts, they likely win the game. If the defensive player succeeds nine times out of ten attempts, they likely lose the game.
And don’t get me started on goalies. You might touch the ball only a couple dozen times each game, and only a handful of those touches are meaningful, but if you screw one of them up, you’re the goat. If you don’t screw any of them up, your teammate on offense has a chance to be the hero. (Yes, I’m a goalie, and no, I’m not actually bitter.)
There are a lot of reasons why defending is easier
1) There is a bigger area to succeed then an attacker. All the defender has to do is keep the ball out of the net . That area is much smaller then the rest of the field. The attacker has to put into the net, which is hard.
2)There is a numerical advantage to defending. There can only be one person on the ball, but there can be multiple on him
3) shot is to striker as a clearance is to defender
Clearances are easier then shots
4) it’s easier to stick a foot out then it is to dribble
I have literally played in every position and that includes goalie. I adhere to the thought that, unless you do something really really really really really really really really really really stupid, it’s not your fault. The ball has to get past 10 other players before it gets past you.
Also, you said that if a defender fails 1/10 times, they would probably lose. Ruling keepers out, you have to consider that it is very likely that the attacker will miss.
every player always has a role and responsiblities
no matter where the ball is on the field (even if you are a fullback on the oppositie side of the field when in the attacking third…then you need to be a position to both provide cover for the CBs in case of a counter, as well as be in a position to provide support in case the focus of attack switches to your side). I don’t completely buy into this “goals against” reflects on the defenders and keeper, and “goals for” reflects on the midfielders and forwards mentality these stats encourage.
Having said that, I do think the backline is not as difficult a position to play in terms of knowledge of the game and creativity. Attacking involves not only recognizing space, but understanding how to create space for others with an awareness of where both you, your teammates, and opponents are (defending is more about restricting space, which also involves the awareness, but not so much the creativity). So I would contend creativity is the big differentiator.
(Though I would also argue playing up the spine is more difficult than out on the wings because you have space 360 degrees around you…playing out on the wings the touchline to an extent defines how you use, or close down, space).
My ramblings thoughts…
I agree, though I'm not sure it has to be creativity
I mean, speed could also be a player’s primary weapon. Look at Theo Walcott. Great attacking player. Creative? Well, not really.
by Adnan Ilyas on Feb 14, 2012 12:37 PM PST up reply actions
point taken
I can’t speak to The Walcott, as I haven’t paid much atention, but I will say speed without creativity is limiting for an attacking player; ie, it can be shut down with speed.
Going back to our first season, I recall Zakuani being shut down by Kevin Alston in our games against NE. The second season, as Zakuani’s game started evolving and he was reading the play much better, working off others, etc,. he started getting the better of Alston in the NE matches.
That is also certainly true
Speed can be limited by speed. However, most defenders don’t have speed. A lot of the fast players go to play in attacking positions. And there’s also the fact that defenders are facing the wrong way for the attack, which hinders them. If they are looking at the incoming player, they have to turn and then catch up to them. That’s one reason why defenders can’t keep a really high line, even if they are fast. There’s a risk that they will get beat. I believe the Rapids were beaten by the Sounders because of a deployed high line.
Not easier, just different
Multiple defenders can cover one attacker, but that tends to leave another attacker open elsewhere. It’s easier to stick a foot out than to dribble, but a decent dribbler will blow right past you and your lonely foot waving in the breeze. Clearing the ball is easier than shooting, but again, one bad clearance per game can lead to disaster while one good shot per game can lead to victory.
The biggest difference between defending and attacking is the mentality. Attacking is creativity, seeing a hole in the defense and taking advantage of it, getting the defender off balance physically or mentally, doing the unexpected, taking a chance, taking a half-chance, failing over and over again, and finally hitting a perfect shot. Defending is consistency, avoiding holes in the defense, seeing a potential threat and closing it off before it develops, reacting to the attacker without overreacting, not taking risky chances, and fending off every attack again and again until the game ends and you can relax. Not easier, just different.
You could make an argument
that the proof it’s easier is manifested in the salaries paid to players. Attackers (and even midfielders) command a higher salary than defenders. It tells you that GM’s value good attackers more than good defenders. You could make a supply/demand argument, but I think it will still yield the same result.
I don’t think anyone is saying defending is easy; just that it’s easier than scoring goals, and the evidence is brought forth by that Soccer by the Numbers article.
by ABTsportsline on Feb 14, 2012 12:20 PM PST up reply actions
Sadly, in this case, that would be a cyclical argument.
I’m trying to justify lower wages by saying that the job is easier, which is manifested in lower wages. See, I just can’t make that argument right now.
by Adnan Ilyas on Feb 14, 2012 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
The thing about the game is that it's so hard to score a goal
Attackers work to out-do defenders. If they don’t, they don’t score. Therefore, the job of an attacker is harder then a defenders. That isn’t to say that defenders don’t work hard. They do work hard. It isn’t to say that some traits aren’t good for defending and not so much so for attacking. It isn’t to say that the mentality is the same.
Another way to illustrate the point
Does it matter if an attacker lacks consistency? Well, yes.
Does it matter if a defender doesn’t have creativity? not really
by Adnan Ilyas on Feb 14, 2012 12:34 PM PST up reply actions
Well, consistently awesome is the ideal...
But if forced to choose, I’d rather have an attacker who lacks consistency — who frequently gives the ball away easily but once per game does something brilliant — than an attacker who is consistently somewhat dangerous.
Montero is inconsistent. He spaces out for long stretches, then hits some amazing shots.
Or how about this?
Would you rather see Parke play forward or Montero play defense? Which would be the greater net loss: the number of goals Montero would have scored but Parke does not, or the number of goals Parke would have prevented that Montero allows?
Well, that is a different proposition
You are asking players who have been conditioned to play one role to take up another. That is sidestepping the question. But does Parke play any considerable attacking role? I know that I’ve seen players like Robin van Persie track back into defense.
But since you raised that point, do you think that Montero would have no success as a defender? Especially since he is partnered with another CB? Can you tell me that Parke would be able to get a single shot on target as a lone target man, or a second striker? Because it is easier to defend, the stance is made that it’s better to not concede goals then to concede many and try to outscore.
Montero would be a disaster on defense
I’m not saying Parke would be a great attacker, but Montero would be completely lost playing in the back. Attackers and defenders have different skills and, as you note, they have learned different roles. Neither role is easier, just different.
Your argument seems to be that because few goals are scored, defense is easy. Does that mean that, in basketball, offense is easy?
I did not say it was easy
Easier is the case. Most players have to track back and defend at some point in the game. Not true for attack
My argument is not that because few goals are scored, it is easier.
You can’t argue roles either because soccer does not have fixed roles. Yes, Montero should not be a CB, and Parke should not be a ST, but there has to be SOME flexibility.
Defending is easier then Attacking. I know because I played defender for years because I was too sucky of a player to play as an attacker for years.
If I don’t convince you at with this final argument, let’s just agree to disagree
A defender has to do his job better then an attacker. If not, a goal will get scored on. That job entitles clearing, tackling, positioning, and being lucky. Now, in order to score, an attacker has to do his job better then the defender and the keeper combined. Therefore, it is easier to defend then attack
Barcelona is the best team in the world
Barcelona plays attacking football
No other team in La Liga is as good as Barcelona
Every team except Real Madrid goes for a draw or a lucky win against Barcelona
Teams play extremely defensively against Barcelona
Barcelona sometimes draws/loses against these defensive teams
it is hard for the best team in the world to attack a poorer, but defensive side
Defense is therefore easier then attack.
I'd like to see Centerbacks and Fullbacks separated
Before drawing any huge conclusions at least, Defenders as a whole unit might be too broad.
Our two main Centerbacks were among the strongest in the index for our team, one of our Fullbacks was pretty high as well, but I’d also like to see how it compares across the league.
I’d also like to see Centermids separated from Widemids.
Playoff's
Seattle’s lower defender rating may catch up to them when things tighten up in the playoff’s, which is why the Sounders get knocked out early. Things tighten up and every mistake is magnified. Also good defenders not only stop others from scoring but they help keep possession, Seattle defenders often lost the ball in bad positions, or their clearances always ended up going straight to the opponents.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
