.png)
Volleyball Scouting Skills Progression Review 2024
tl:dr
It’s great I am still improving my scouting skills in DataVolley (e,g. grading the defence and separating defence into Spike Cover and After Block) and I’m rethinking how to code situations to get the best analysis (e.g. coding Dig Errors After Block)
However, I did move some coding (e.g. extension codes of Spike Cover, After Block etc) to after I coded the match when I wanted to be able to code everything in real time.
Scouting Skills Progression Review 2024
I outlined my progression in scouting skills to eventually being able to code everything in DataVolley (see link). The 2023-24 season is fully over now so how did I progress?
What Did I Learn?
Issues with Coding Standing Float (T)I should code standing float serves with the “T” code rather than the default “H” code (see link to read more). I thought I was doing this correctly and consistently until I saw a player had jump float serves stats when he only did standing float serves. It was clear I did not actively code the “T” and I just left it as the default “H” code. I did have to go back and recode all of those serves so I was more conscious that I had to press the “T” button. I haven’t checked since but I don’t think it is an issue now.
Redefining the Hybrid ServeI should code hybrid serves using the “N” code. I originally decided that all service attempts by a hybrid server should be coded with the “N” code, regardless of whether they made a float or top-spin contact. Upon reflection, it didn’t make sense to do it this way. Firstly, I couldn’t do any analysis on hybrid servers, e.g. how effective is a player’s top-spin contact compared to their float contact or how often does the hybrid server make the top-spin contact? Secondly, I don’t know if a player is a hybrid server so when they do hit a hybrid serve, I would have to clean up the timeline after I coded the match. regardless of whether they made a float or top-spin contact. Upon reflection, it didn’t make sense to do it this way. Firstly, I couldn’t do any analysis on hybrid servers, e.g. how effective is a player’s top-spin contact compared to their float contact or how often does the hybrid server make the top-spin contact? Secondly, I don’t know if a player is a hybrid server so when they do hit a hybrid serve, I would have to clean up the timeline after I coded the match. So I have now redefined the “N” code to mean a jump float approach with top spin contact and any jump float approach with a float contact should be coded regularly using the “H” code. So I have now redefined the “N” code to mean a jump float approach with top spin contact and any jump float approach with a float contact should be coded regularly using the “H” code.
Grey Area Between the Shanked Pass (R/) and Negative Pass (R-)I decided those shanked passes that players have to chase down but are kept in play will be coded the same as overpasses (R/) since the Sideout % should both be similar (i.e. very low)(see link to read more). However, I had numerous situations when a player is chasing down the ball but they may be able to bump set it. Chasing down the pass just to keep the ball in play should be coded as R/ but all bump sets should be coded as R-. So it was quite tricky to grade those situations. I just wanted to check what I did so I did spend a couple of matches checking my passing grades. I was pleased to find that I generally agreed with what I originally coded. The delineator was if the player, usually the setter, could reasonably bump set the ball.
Grading Dig Attempts the Same as Passing AttemptsI decided to grade defence attempts similar to how I grade the pass. The main difference is positive (R+) and perfect (R#) equivalent passes are graded together as D#, equivalent medium pass (R!) is graded as D+, and the spare D! grade is used to code spike cover dig like how the pros do it. Click on this link on how I grade the pass.
This sounded simple in theory but I found it incredibly difficult to do in practice. The biggest issue was rewiring my brain so a positive equivalent pass (R+) is coded as D# and a medium equivalent pass (R!) is coded as D+. I also had issues coding D! for spike cover digs as they come so fast. I eventually found rather than going against the grain, I would just apply the same gradings for digs as for passing and find another way to code for spike cover digs (read below).
Using Extended Codes to Code Spike Cover Dig AttemptsSince I’m not using D! for spike cover digs, I decided I would use the Extended Code to code spike cover digs. Coding it this way also had the added advantage I could potentially grade the quality of the spike cover digs. This does require me to open up the Extended Codes window (“W” button in my case) and then press the “C” button for the Spike Cover. This was going to be impossible to do this in real-time as spike cover digs are the fastest part of the rally. I decided I would add these extended codes after I coded the match.
Coding Dig Attempts After a Block Touch I had a middle player with a really high Dig % but according to my coach’s eye, he was a terrible defender. I might be completely wrong and he could be a highly unrated defender so I checked his defence attempts on video. I found most of their dig attempts came after their own block touch. The player also made a lot of service errors so there was limited opportunity to defend spike attacks. I had to separate these digs with regular digs from a spike so I decided to use the Extended Codes to code the Dig was After a Block Touch (DB). Similarly to coding spike covers, I decided to add these extended codes after I coded the match.
Coding Dig Errors After BlockSince I was coding dig attempts after a block touch, I realised my Dig After a Block % was always 100% when I tried to add it to my match report. This was impossible so I investigated why this is the case. I found it that I would code Digs After Block (read above) but I don’t code any Dig Errors After Block (D=B). Situations when I could code Dig Errors After Block (D=B) would be coded as either a Block Out (B/) or a regular Dig Error (D=) with the Block Touch (B+) not coded. I decided to change how I code those situations to include Dig Errors After Block (D=B). I decided if there was a block touch and there was a chance it could have been defended, I would code it as a Negative Block (B-) and a Dig Error after Block (D=B). If there was no chance for the ball to be defended, it would still be coded as a regular block out (B/). This does lead to grey areas, e.g. when a block touch deflects the spiked ball over a defender’s head. It was a big deflection so it is a block out(B/) but it was within the area of the defender so it could have been defended (B-, D=B). when a block touch deflects the spiked ball over a defender’s head. It was a big deflection so it is a block out(B/) but it was within the area of the defender so it could have been defended (B-, D=B). I fell into aI fell into a guideline if the deflected ball was going to land outside the court then I would code a block out (B/) but if it landed inside the court, I would have coded a missed dig (D=B) because somebody could have defended that area of the court. guideline if the deflected ball was going to land outside the court then I would code a block out (B/) but if it landed inside the court, I would have coded a missed dig (D=B) because somebody could have defended that area of the court.
Unintentional Fully Grading the BlockSince I was using the negative block grade (B-), I realised I was using all six blocking grades. I have just unintentionally fully graded the block (see below). This sounds great because fully grading the block was one of the last things I wanted to do and I was already doing it now (albeit, all after the match and not in real-time). However, I can already see this current grading system isn’t great. I don’t have a grade to cover negative block touches that puts the team out-of-system. Although I could still grade it under B-. The other issue is I still don’t have a grade to code missed block assignments, i.e. block attempts where the blocker does not touch the attacked ball. This code is vital in measuring blocking performance effectively because block attempts are currently recorded when the player touched the spiked attack but block jumps doesn’t touch the spiked attack.
Final Thoughts
It is great that I am still improving and rethinking how to code situations to get the best analysis. However, I did find that I moved some of the coding, e.g. adding extension codes for Spike Cover and Dig After Block, to after I coded the match. As well as adding an hour of post-match analysis time, I did want to get to a level where I could code it all in real-time.
Comments