.png)
Should Setters Attack More Often?
Introduction
I generally think setters should attack the ball more often. I tend to like at least 2 setter attack attempts per set. This is because it adds a different dimension to the team’s overall attack, i.e. it is not just left, middle or right side attacks, if those options are even available. It also keeps the opposition defence honest in defending high for those tipped attacks rather than just staying deep to defend the regular spiked attacks. I also think setter attacks are generally highly effective in scoring points. While I can’t test whether the first two reasons are true, I can test the assumption of whether the setter attack is an effective point scorer. We can do this by comparing the hitting percentage of the setter attack and the hitting percentage if the setter set the ball for a team mate to spike the ball. So what did the data show?
Method
I collated the data relating to spiked attacks (third ball contact attacks) and setter attacks (second ball contact attacks). All overpass attacks (first ball contact attacks) are excluded from the data. This is because I wanted to know whether it was more effective for the setter to attack the ball or to set the ball for a spiked attack. I used the hitting percentage [H% = (Kills – Errors)/ Total Attack Attempts] as the measurement for attack effectiveness.
I’ve collated data from the past 4 seasons. The data relates to the teams I have statted for – IBB Polonia London, Polonia SideOut London, City University London, England Men Senior National Team – plus their opponent’s data. The data will be biased towards those teams and not a wholly representative sample of the league itself. The exception is the 2017-18 and 2019-20 Women’s Super League seasons where I scouted a lot of opposition matches. Also I statted 5 of the 6 matches at the Novotel Cup, where the England Men Senior National Team was involved.
The data is also separated by gender and by competition. I separated the data by gender as there could be diferences, if any, that relate to the anthropometric and physiological differences between the genders or the 19cm difference in net height. I also separated the data by competition as there could be patterns due to the competition level.
Setter Attacks versus Spiked Attacks
The two tables below the total spiked and setter attack attempts and their hitting percentage for men and women, separated by competition. It also includes the difference in hitting % between the spike and setter attacks.
Women
The table shows that spike attacks (17%) are only slightly better than setter attacks (14%). There doesn’t look to be any discernable patterns on a competition level, as it looks like they are hovering on the -3% difference in hitting pct.
Men
On the men’s side, it looks like setter attacks (30%) are 9% more effective than spike attacks (20%). It may be that is gets more effective at the higher the competition level with +9% hitting pct. difference in Super League Level and +17% hitting pct. difference at Novotel Cup (International) level but there are too few setter attack attempts (11) at Champions League level to make it a pattern.
Setter Attacks versus Spiked Attacks by After Reception versus In Transition
It could be that setter attacks are more effective in transition compared to after reception as the game is a lot more fluid and the opposition defence may not always be in the correct position to defend. So I separated the spike and setter attacks by phase, i.e. after reception and in transition.
WomenThe table shows that while the spike hitting pct. reminds the same in both phases (17%), the setter attack is actually more effective in transition phase (17%) compared to after reception (10%). Only in the Women’s Super League in transition phase that setter attacks (22%) are more effective than spike attacks (18%). Again, there doesn’t look to be any pattern with competition level.
MenIt does look like it is setter attacks are slightly more effective in transition (12%) than after reception (9%). This seems to be more pronounced in the Super League level. There’s too few setter attack attempts statted in the Champions League and Novotel Cup to establish a baseline of results to see if there’s any patterns by competition level.
Setter Attacks versus Spiked Attacks by After Positive Reception versus After an Opposition Free Ball
There are numerous situations in both after reception and in transition phases where there is no chance for the setter to attack the ball but you can still put up a ball for a spiked attack. So I wanted to look at situations where the setter is able to attack and to set the ball for an spike attack. The only two situations where I can able to collate data on this is after a positive reception (includes both perfect and positive pass) and after an opposition free ball (it should usually result digging the ball so all attack options are available). It would be good to have the data after a positive dig/ defence but unfortunately I don’t collect data on defence (for now at least – see link on compound codes).
WomenWhen the conditions are similar for both setter and spike attacks, the table now shows setter attacks are better than spike attacks after an opposition free ball (+6% difference). At Super League level, setter attacks has an hitting pct. of 49%, which is +21% better over spike attacks.
MenThere’s too attempts to establish a baseline of performance. But if I was to guess, the same pattern would follow the women that setter attacks are the most effective after an opposition free ball.
Discussion
The data shows that setter attacks in general are effective in the men’s game but not in the women’s game. This could be because men tend to be taller than women so the types of setter attacks are slightly different. I would guess male setters tend to forcefully attack the second contact down with one hand while female setters tend to volley the ball deceptively over the net. This would mean the men have less time to defend while the women have slightly more time. But I don’t have the data to test this idea out.
Setter attacks also tends to be more effective in the transition phase compared to after reception, in particularly if it comes after an opposition free ball. This could be because after reception, the serving team are already in position to defend whereas in transition, things are more fluid so they may not be in the right position to defend. It could be that things are even more fluid in a free ball situation. This argument could be applied with spiked attacks too but at least there’s time for the defence to get into position to defend.
It’s difficult to tell if there’s trends in relation to level of competition, i.e. whether setter attacks gets more effective compared to spiked attacks the higher the competition level. The data does indicate that at Women’s BUCS Division 1 level, there’s no situation where it is better for the setter to attack rather than setting the ball for a team mate to spike.
In Practice
The data indicates that higher level male setters (Super League level and above) should attack the ball more often. I don’t have any data for lower level male setters unfortunately. For higher level female setter (Super League level and above), there could be a slight benefit for setters to attack more often. For both higher level male and female setters, the setter attack is best done in transition rather than after reception and it is particularly better after an opposition free ball. For lower level female setters (BUCS Division 1 and below), the data indicates that regular spike attacks are better than setter attacks. It doesn’t even improve after an opposition free ball.
However, these are just general trends. Whether your setter should attack more often would simply depend on efficient your setter can attack. I know I have faced some teams where the setter’s attack was a major strength and that should absolutely be exploited.
Comments