Talking Corners: Season 16 - Printable Version +- SSL Forum (https://forum.simulationsoccer.com) +-- Forum: Player Development (https://forum.simulationsoccer.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=5) +--- Forum: Capped Point Tasks (https://forum.simulationsoccer.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=23) +---- Forum: Articles (https://forum.simulationsoccer.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=46) +---- Thread: Talking Corners: Season 16 (/showthread.php?tid=5797)

Talking Corners: Season 16 - Wiggli - 2024-10-21 First things first, this entire exercise will be more anecdote than data-driven. There simply isn’t the volume of data to draw firm conclusions. But by investigating the level of success different teams achieved in their corners over the last year we might surface some hypotheses that more targeted simulation testing could investigate properly.   And so we start with the high level results. Corners scored in league play last season: Table topping Reykjavik reigned supreme with 10 goals scored from corners. While laggards Catalunya and Sao Paulo finished last with only one goal off corners during league play. That sort of correlation to results should pique our interests, but maybe what we’re seeing is simply circular: better teams have better players, better organization, and that’s what leads to the disparity in corner scored. The truly interesting cases that might lead to uncovering what drives differential results is noticing that the team who ultimately finished second SFV scored a relatively meager 3 goals off corners.   Let’s compare Reykjavik and SFV head to head. First, SFV who we might think showed signs of underperformance considering their general talent level and strong tactical organization. Ive captured the positioning and personnel the team employed (as of the end of the season at least). I think most attention should be focused on the personnel I’ve captured what FM lists as the relevant attributes for the player group. Be they Technique driven for the taker, or aerial focused for the targets. We also see the attributes for the peripheral players. At a glance SFV seems to not be lacking in any of these key positions. A strong corner taker and targets that are heavily invested in the aerial attributes. But let’s compare to Reykjavik: Wow. Beyond adequately statted these targets are maxed on the jumping reach attribute. And they have not one but two well skilled corner takers optimized to serve inswinging balls from either side of the pitch. With regard to the x’s and o’s I think it’s difficult to draw any strong conclusions. But I think we do see some potential differences in personnel that may be contributing to the difference in results.   Let’s compare two other similarly skilled teams to see if we can strengthen this finding. Tokyo was a mid-table team that scored 7 goals from corners. First thing to note from the play diagram they targeted the far post instead of the near post, they also employ an aerial threat to mark the keeper. But otherwise we see quite some similarity to the successful Reykjavik strategy. A corner taker for each side, and two maxed or nearly maxed aerial threats. Buenos Aires has a lot in common with Tokyo, but their performance on attacking corners was a disappointment. Looking at their tactics and personnel we see an approach very similar to SFV. No serious deficiency, I think what we are seeing is that to succeed at corners you need to make a considerable investment.   Again it needs to be said this isn’t enough volume of evidence to make any conclusive statements, but I think we do have some trends which deserve further investigation: Winning the aerial battle may require maxed or nearly maxed aerial threats. There may be a benefit to having a proper footed kicker for each side. (is it enough to invest in strengthening your weak foot?) Curls Ball is a pervasive trait used for corner takers, but is it necessary. Positioning (near v far post, mark keeper etc.) seems secondary to personnel. The “real world” analytics community has a love for the somewhat more controlled environment of set pieces. In our simulated world it is also a nice place to focus our analysis given the more limited number of interactions. But I think one thing this analysis also has suggested is that optimizing your corner is not a free lunch. To get elite performance it looks like you need to make an elite investment. The TPE spent to get to a maxed level of aerial skills or develop a capable corner taker from both sides could be spent profitably elsewhere. RE: Talking Corners: Season 16 - Wiggli - 2024-11-05 Update on this. We saw Tokyo lose their primary corner taker and they saw significantly worse performance on corners so far this season. Again just an anecdote, but some evidence that the corner taker is at least as important as the target. And another opportunity to reflect on the fact that corners aren't everything as despite losing ~7 goals from corners they performed better point-wise overall.