2015 FIVB World League

    One word only :
    BRAVO :cup:

    Congratulations to France :cup: well deserved victory ^^


    MVP: Earvin Ngapeth (FRA)
    S: Benjamin Toniutti (FRA)
    OP: Aleksandar Atanasijevic (SRB)
    OH1: Earvin Ngapeth (FRA)
    OH2: Michal Kubiak (POL)
    MB1: Maxwell Holt (USA)
    MB2: Srecko Lisinac (SRB)
    L: Pawel Zatorski (POL)


    I'd give it differently for OP and L :wavy:

    Gold medal - World League 2013 Prediction Game
    Bronze medal - World League 2012 Prediction Game


    Who would you give it to and why?

    Quote from laikon


    Who would you give it to and why?

    Maybe Atansijevic is ok for OP position - best scorer in F6 and 2nd best spiker behind Anderson (though Rouzier, Kurek or Anderson would be also ok), but for Libero IMHO Grebennikov deserved it more :wavy:

    Gold medal - World League 2013 Prediction Game
    Bronze medal - World League 2012 Prediction Game

    Quote from laikon

    Just check the statistics and you will understand.
    Grebennikov: digs 40 per 16 sets = 2.5 dig per set, reception: 35.59%
    Zatorski: digs 40 per 17 sets = 2.35 dig per set, reception: 58%
    Can you see the difference now?

    Yup, I see. But we discussed many times, also here on this forum, that overall impression about the player sometimes says more than raw statistics. What really matters, to me, it's a player's contribution to the team's final result. As I can see, it's not only me having the impression that Jennia deserved this award more ;)

    Quote from bella

    Yup, I see. But we discussed many times, also here on this forum, that overall impression about the player sometimes says more than raw statistics. What really matters, to me, it's a player's contribution to the team's final result. As I can see, it's not only me having the impression that Jennia deserved this award more ;)

    Is impression a really valid criterion? If in your opinion it is I have no arguments to discuss it. As for cotribution to the team's final result - even if a libero makes a great dig and saves the ball, he needs someone to set the ball and spike it. So in your opinion Zatorski should be punished for a poor performance of his teammates? How fair is it?

    Quote from laikon

    Is impression a really valid criterion? If in your opinion it is I have no arguments to discuss it. As for cotribution to the team's final result - even if a libero make a great dig and saves the ball, he needs someone to set the ball and spike it. So in your opinion Zatorski should be punished for a poor performance of his teammates? How fair is it?


    The stats which you and people like raylight so often present are essential and indispensive element of volleyball nowadays, no doubt. However, their greatest flaw is that they can present only quantitative data. The qualitative data can be extracted only from experts or fans watching the games and making their own judgements. And that is why there is a jury who votes for the best players and that's not made automatic by a computer.


    To illuminate more on that, Zatorski can have better percentages over Grebennikov but that also depends on the opponents' serves and spikes. The stats don't show how difficult their digs are. The easiest example would be that if Nikola Rosic defends against a less potent attack like the one of Spain, let's say, he might have a better percentage than Grebennikov against the USA. But that doesn't mean anything.


    Of course, you might say that in World League F6 the teams are pretty much equal in strength and my example is irrelevant and you might be quite right. And also, that the amount of digs they have to do eliminates the statistical error element, but I don't quite agree here.


    For me Grebennikov was the better libero both in terms of plays and in terms of his presence and leadership on court (which is also not caught by the statistics). And if the majority of the people here say that Jenia was undeniably the better libero, then it's either that this forum is full of biased laymen, or that the stats as a measure of performance is somewhat flawed.


    Stats for me are a lot more important for prediction. Therefore, they are mostly valuable for coaches and assistants in the preparation before matches.

    Quote from laikon

    Is impression a really valid criterion? If in your opinion it is I have no arguments to discuss it. As for cotribution to the team's final result - even if a libero make a great dig and saves the ball, he needs someone to set the ball and spike it. So in your opinion Zatorski should be punished for a poor performance of his teammates? How fair is it?

    Saying about general impression I didn't mean that a player was just fun or nice to watch, it's more about the feeling that some player looked just better comparing to the other one. Of course, looking at the statistics it's often like that you realize that number support this second player and you ask yourself "really?". That's why I don't build my opinion based on only numbers in statistics sheet. I don't blame Zatorski for the result of my team, not a single player should be punished! Still I think Grebennikov was better on this tournament. Just my personal opinion, can I have one? My opinion won't take away this award from Zatorski, we can all have our own favorites to be awarded and exchange opinions on the topic. You questioned only my choice of libero, do you have statistics to question my choice of MB as well?


    Very good arguments. Pity Bella wasn't able to provide them and needed your help. She simply expressed her opinion without justifying it. As I definitely agree with your interpetation of digging statistics we cannot apply it to reception. The difference between Grebennikov and Zatorski is huge and we are not talking about positive reception but excellent reception 35.59 (revceiving only 59 times) cannot be compared to 58% (receiving 83 times). For me it means that perhaps Grebennikov is a better libero overall but Zatorski is much better receiver.
    As for leadership - I definitely agree - Zatorski has no such inclinations but no each member of the team needs to be a leader.

    Quote from laikon


    Very good arguments. Pity Bella wasn't able to provide them and needed your help. She simply expressed her opinion without justifying it. As I definitely agree with your interpetation of digging statistics we cannot apply it to reception. The difference between Grebennikov and Zatorski is huge and we are not talking about positive reception but excellent reception 35.59 (revceiving only 59 times) cannot be compared to 58% (receiving 83 times). For me it means that perhaps Grebennikov is a better libero overall but Zatorski is much better receiver.
    As for leadership - I definitely agree - Zatorski has no such inclinations but not each member of the team needs to be a leader.

    Quote from bella

    Saying about general impression I didn't mean that a player was just fun or nice to watch, it's more about the feeling that some player looked just better comparing to the other one. Of course, looking at the statistics it's often like that you realize that number support this second player and you ask yourself "really?". That's why I don't build my opinion based on only numbers in statistics sheet. I don't blame Zatorski for the result of my team, not a single player should be punished! Still I think Grebennikov was better on this tournament. Just my personal opinion, can I have one? My opinion won't take away this award from Zatorski, we can all have our own favorites to be awarded and exchange opinions on the topic. You questioned only my choice of libero, do you have statistics to question my choice of MB as well?


    Quote from bella

    Saying about general impression I didn't mean that a player was just fun or nice to watch, it's more about the feeling that some player looked just better comparing to the other one. Of course, looking at the statistics it's often like that you realize that number support this second player and you ask yourself "really?". That's why I don't build my opinion based on only numbers in statistics sheet. I don't blame Zatorski for the result of my team, not a single player should be punished! Still I think Grebennikov was better on this tournament. Just my personal opinion, can I have one? My opinion won't take away this award from Zatorski, we can all have our own favorites to be awarded and exchange opinions on the topic. You questioned only my choice of libero, do you have statistics to question my choice of MB as well?


    No doubt you have a right to express your opinion but it is fair to the people's effort to justify it if you want to evaluate somebody else's performance and that's why I asked for justification. As for MB I have no idea why Holt got the award but I know that Le Roux's blocking statistics were not good either. I can give you the details tomorrow.

    Quote from laikon

    Very good arguments. Pity Bella wasn't able to provide them and needed your help. She simply expressed her opinion without justifying it. As I definitely agree with your interpetation of digging statistics we cannot apply it to reception. The difference between Grebennikov and Zatorski is huge and we are not talking about positive reception but excellent reception 35.59 (revceiving only 59 times) cannot be compared to 58% (receiving 83 times). For me it means that perhaps Grebennikov is a better libero overall but Zatorski is much better receiver.
    As for leadership - I definitely agree - Zatorski has no such inclinations but no each member of the team needs to be a leader.

    Pity that you think that I expect and need other users' help. Next time I will give you list of my arguments numbered.

    Quote from bella

    Pity that you think that I expect and need other users' help. Next time I will give you list of my arguments numbered.


    I would deninitely appreciate it. Now, your question about MBs. It seems that they based their choice on blocking statistics:
    Lisinać: 0.67 block per set
    Holt: 0.62
    Nowakowski: 0.59
    Le Roux: 0.5

    The FIVB does a horrible job of keeping track of statistics, how many sets or points did each player play?


    The stat that we all love, which is ridiculous is Who Was the Best Scorer of the Tournament? If a player always plays in 5 set matches, they will have a chance to more points than someone who played in 3 set matches, right? So, shouldn't they average it down to the number of points per sets played?

    Quote from YavorD

    Many of the things you mentioned attracted my attention as well, great analysis :) What I would add is the great variety of OHs in the Serbian team. I was a bit surprised Petric didn't start and actually didn't play yesterday, but it must've been due to the exhausting five-setter against Poland. And yet, Grbic started with the Kovacevic brothers just like he can rotate his OHs at any time and it worked great. It seemed Serbia got into the finals slowly, underestimating the Italians on the opening day a bit, then almost failed against Poland as well, just to wake up in time against USA. Kudos to the American team, too, they fought back their way having trailed by 2 sets. They didn't show their best volleyball against Serbia, so here I have to disagree with you, but they were also hindered by injuries - Russell obviously hasn't fully recovered yet, the libero Shoji got injured, then Sander had to leave the field. So many misfortunes and yet they made it to a tie-break. I am not impressed by Lotman, he used to be a very interesting player some time ago, I don't see the same Lotman anymore. Also, Christenson didn't play his best game yesterday, so USA got the maximum out of this semifinal.


    Both Serbia and France played better (or slightly better) than their opponents in the semis and yet both matches needed 5 sets just to make life more interesting :D Great volleyball, no question about it. I totally agree that these must be the best World League finals since... I don't know, maybe 2011.


    I am also looking forward to the new winner of the league. Historically speaking, Serbia needs to have some glory after these 4 failed final matches, but I still believe France would make the surprise. But maybe they will finish 9th regardless of whether they win or not :D


    Petric didn't start the match likely because of his reception, that's the weakest among the 4 OHs in the Serbian team. When he struggles in reception, his offensive performance would also start to decline.


    Yeah, USA didn't play their best volleyball in the semi. Apart from the weakened Italy, Serbia is likely the weakest team in F6, though the margin is narrow. Btw, Sander seems to have improved in reception -- there's not a moment that he's sent off-court after being targeted for reception (with the possible exception in the match vs Brazil, which I didn't watch).