After all the talk about depth, short roster, and the invocation of "fatigue" during the last few playoff runs the last couple of years, I decided to look into how the Revs distribute their minutes played as compared to DC's, as the discussion came up in the post-game thread). The comparison also works because we've played the same amount of league games. I did not include superliga or open cup games, but someone could easily do a comparison with the way Colorado distributed minutes if they wanted to get an equivalent number of total games played, i guess. After that, I took a brief look around the league to see if the DCU comparison was an aberrant one. ------------------- Comparison with DC ------------------- Players with 20 games played or more: Revs: 11 DCU: 5 Players with 10 games played or more: Revs: 14 DCU: 18 Players with 5 games played or more: Revs: 15 DCU: 20 Players with over 1700 minutes played (82% of season): Revs: 8 DCU: 4 Players with over 200 minutes played (9.6% of season) Revs: 14 DCU: 19 Players with over 90 minutes played, all season: Revs: 15 DCU: 22 Players with over 80% of all minutes played this season: Revs:8 DCU: 4 Players with over 75% of all minutes played this season: Revs: 10 DCU: 5 Players with over 65% of all minutes played this season: Revs: 10 DCU: 9 Percentage of total minutes played represented by top 11 players in MP: Revs: 83% DCU: 75% Percentage of total minutes played represented by top 13 players in MP: Revs: 94% DCU: 84% ---------------------------------------- Around the League: -The Revs have more players with 20GP or more than any other team, despite 3 teams playing 1 more game, and 1 team having 2 more games. The Revs have 11 players with 20GP or more--KCW is 2nd with 9 (1 more GP), Houston is 3rd with 8 (2 more GP). -Here's a chart of the number of players each team has that have played 75% (or more) of the total minutes played this season: chi: 4 chv: 5 col: 4 cbus: 5 dcu: 5 fcd: 4 hou: 6 kcw: 8 ner: 10 rbny: 4 rsl: 3 tfc: 3
The Revs have a core group of players that start every game they are available. DC (as an example) also has a core group of players, however they are rested - Ben Olsen didn't start yesterday's game but still got 30 minutes in, for example. However I think our numbers are probably artificially high because none of our core group has gotten injured this season (knock on wood).
The long and skinny of it is this: it's not going to get any easier, especially with Nicol's admission that it's unlikely the Revolution will add any additional playersa before the roster freeze deadline.
These disparities seem a bit high to be simply a matter of luck. I don't think a key injury would have so much effected these stats as it would the Revs won/loss column. My guess is that these figures were similar last year. It's there in black-and-white: the Revs core unit has played WAY more minutes than any other team in the league. It has also been an observable fact that key Rev players have looked fatigued/dinged up towards the end of preceeding seasons - and noticeably in MLS title games. It's not hard to make a connection. And it's not difficult to surmise the cause. The key question is whether the will and resources exist to formulate a solution.
Great stats miked9! Thanks for the compilation. The data is there, it has been there and now the people in a position of responsbility need to do something about it. The difference between 75% of time played and 65% of time played is pretty dang dramatic. Depth is an issue, plain and simple. The signs of it are also in our play.
Great job Mike. But luckily if we make the MLS Cup, I'm sure our guys won't be tired, and our fans won't use the "Well they were tired" excuse.
You would think the team who played Thursday night in LA, flew the red-eye Friday morning and played on a hot, humid Sunday would be the ones to run out of gas late in the game. No, we were the rested team who couldn't hold a 2-1 lead. But 2 out of 3 ain't bad... We won't win the supporters shield*, but we can still win the other two trophies, according to the kool-aid gang. *That's because we need to make up 5 points on DC, and the toughest games they have left are away trips to Chicago and KC. We play Dallas at home and away to NY and Chicago. They also play both RSL and Toronto at home. Not a lot of losses coming there.
I don't buy this arguement. If we were in europe, we'd have at least 10 more games a season. Americans are also well conditioned and very athletic. Personally, I think the real answer is that we are simply an inconsistant side. Can't be simply fatigue... because the ups and downs are consistant from the start of the season until now. Sat 4/7/2007 8:30 PM @ Chicago Fire TV38 1-0 L Sat 4/14/2007 7:30 PM vs Toronto FC TV38 4-0 W Thu 4/19/2007 7:00 PM @ Columbus Crew ESPN2 2-2 T Sun 4/29/2007 3:00 PM @ FC Dallas TV38 1-0 W Thu 5/3/2007 7:00 PM @ D.C. United ESPN2 1-1 T Sun 5/6/2007 5:00 PM vs Chicago Fire TV38 3-1 W Sat 5/12/2007 10:30 PM @ Los Angeles Galaxy TV38 3-2 W Sat 5/19/2007 8:30 PM @ Houston Dynamo FSC 1-0 W Sat 5/26/2007 6:30 PM vs Kansas City Wizards TV38 4-3 L Sat 6/2/2007 7:30 PM vs Real Salt Lake TV38 0-0 T Sat 6/16/2007 6:30 PM vs Columbus Crew FSC 3-3 T Sat 6/23/2007 7:30 PM vs Toronto FC TV38 3-0 W Sat 6/30/2007 10:30 PM @ CD Chivas USA TV38 2-0 L Sat 7/7/2007 7:30 PM vs CD Chivas USA TV38 1-1 T Tue 7/10/2007 7:35 PM @ Rochester Rhinos *Open Cup* 4-2 W Sat 7/14/2007 7:30 PM @ New York Red Bulls FSC 1-0 W Sun 7/22/2007 4:00 PM vs Houston Dynamo TV38 3-3 T Sat 7/28/2007 9:30 PM @ Real Salt Lake FSC 2-1 W Thu 8/2/2007 7:00 PM vs Kansas City Wizards ESPN2 2-0 W Sun 8/5/2007 4:00 PM vs D.C. United TV38 3-0 L Wed 8/8/2007 7:30 PM vs Harrisburg City Islanders *Open Cup* 2-0 W Sun 8/12/2007 7:00 PM vs Los Angeles Galaxy TV38 1-0 W Thu 8/16/2007 9:00 PM @ Colorado Rapids FSN 3-0 L Sun 8/19/2007 8:00 PM @ Kansas City Wizards TV38 1-0 W Sat 8/25/2007 7:30 PM vs New York Red Bulls TV38 2-1 W Tue 9/4/2007 7:00 PM @ Carolina RailHawks *Open Cup* 2-1 W Sun 9/9/2007 3:00 PM @ D.C. United FSN 4-2 L
We'd have 10 more games, but we'd also have more players on the roster. Hell, we'd be in a better position if we had a full roster that Nicol believed could be used.
If we were in Europe, all the other teams would have 10 more games a season as well. And I guarantee European teams don't have 11 guys lugging 75% of the minutes. It's why the comparison to other MLS teams is particularly revealing.
Going off of the original data, I was struck by the sheer number of players that have played 75% of the potential minutes played or more, and the huge disparity between the Revs and everyone else in the league. I decided to see how the other teams distribute their minutes. Here's the breakdown: Code: [B]Number of players with 75% of potential Minutes Played: [/B]chi: 4 chv: 5 col: 4 cbus: 5 dcu: 5 fcd: 4 hou: 6 kcw: 8 [I]ner: 10 [/I]rbny: 4 rsl: 3 tfc: 3 [B]# of Players w/60% of potential MP: [/B]chi: 9 chv: 11 col: 9 cbus: 11 dcu: 9 fcd: 9 hou: 11 kcw: 10 lag: 5 [I]ner: 11 [/I]rbny: 8 rsl: 5 tfc: 6 [B]50% of potential MP: [/B]chi: 9 chv: 12 col: 10 cbus: 12 dcu: 12 fcd: 10 hou: 11 kcw: 11 lag: 9 [I]ner: 13 [/I]rbny: 11 rsl: 9 tfc: 9 [B]40% of potential MP: [/B]chi: 13 chv: 13 col: 10 cbus: 14 dcu: 14 fcd: 14 hou: 12 kcw: 12 lag: 13 [I]ner: 14 [/I]rbny: 14 rsl: 14 tfc: 12 [B]25% of potential MP: [/B]chi: 16 chv: 14 col: 17 cbus: 15 dcu: 15 fcd: 18 hou: 16 kcw: 14 lag: 17 [I]ner: 14 [/I]rbny: 18 rsl: 19 tfc: 18 [B]10% of potential MP: [/B]chi: 20 chv: 18 col: 22 cbus: 22 dcu: 19 fcd: 21 hou: 20 kcw: 18 lag: 27 [I]ner: 14 [/I]rbny: 21 rsl: 28 tfc: 24 A few things jump out at you, here. First, that the Revs have more "iron-man" players (75% of potential MP or more)than any team in the league, by a long shot. Twice the number than the league average, in fact. Second, that disparity drops dramatically when you look at players who have played 60% of the potential MP or more. The Revs are on equal ground with teams like Houston, Chivas, Columbus on this front, and close to the Wizards. What does this tell us? That the other teams in the league with a "solid core" are more likely to keep the entire core on the pitch for 60-75% of the time, not 75-90% of the time. It's as if every other team in the league has played 2-5 fewer games. That's a disadvantage, particularly as nagging injuries accumulate. Third, with only 14 players getting significant time, there really hasn't been bench flexibility or competition--essentially, there are 14 players that even have a chance of seeing the field for the Revs, which is far far far lower than any other team. Players ranked 12, 13 & 14 in MP for the Revs were essentially the only bench players to make any impact at all--this is John, Thompson, and Cristman. As has been discussed at length, these are players that work hard but do not offer the Revs the opportunity to change the way they can play the game. This makes substitution simply a matter of fatigue or form, and not a matter of tactics. So it's Cristman in for Noonan (or vice versa), Thompson in for Khano (sometimes Dorman), and John in for Riley (or vice versa). This adds to the minutes total of our core guys (Twellman, Ralston, Parkhurst, Heaps, SJ, Laro). One wonders how often those guys are "playing through" injuries that they might not if there were capable replacements at the ready. Or coasting in practice, knowing nobody can realistically take their spot. Finally, we see the opposite problem outlined in LAG, RSL & TFC--too many players shifting in and out, but no real stable lineup (reflected in the 60-75% range, as well as the 10-25%). But we also see a middle ground that successful teams are occupying. Bottom line--there is no question that the Revs are doing things radically different than the rest of the league. Whether this is genius or lunacy is a matter of interpretation, but it is not (at least in the true sense of the term) common sense. There is something different going on that is not about the difficulties of adding players or the strength of the "core"--unless we consider the core to be 10 players.
It can't be argued that we are relying much more heavily on the core group of players than any other team out there. As far as European teams playing more games a season there are some mitigating factors to that: 1. They have more players (as previously stated) 2. They don't travel nearly as far as American players do during the league season. 3. Don't they have a pretty long break during the winter? However, this does mean that given our reliance on our core players, the other teams we play will have better 'rested' or 'less ridden' players. I think this goes to both the mental and physical aspects of the game. It can't be discounted away.
I'll let someone else start today's news thread, but let me warn everyone that Frank Dell'apa has a comment regarding fatigue that will probably cause some of you distress. Please sit down when you read it.
It also means that all the other teams have more players with more game experience - the two go hand in hand. We lost Dempsey, Franchino, Hernandez and Cancela this year. Show me where their minutes went.
don't get me wrong. I know they are tired. I just look at the our pattern of results and see nothing that says we are declining. my point is, you can't look at DC and say... "we lost because we are tired" we had a week and a half off and it's not (at this point) like we are hitting a losing streak. I'm sure they are tired, I'm just not convinced we are suffereing from the fatigue yet. Do I think we have a depth problem? hell yes... we rely on the same core because no one else can step up and be a legit starter. just my opinion I'm far to lazy to start analying european teams players minutes, but (other than the big superclubs who can afford 2 rosters), I bet it's not all that much different from MLS. it's the same 8 or so starting most weeks
8 is fine ... we've got basically the same 11 starting each and every week. The only possible change has been Thompson for Khano, or Riley/John. In general though, the starting 11 hasn't varied by more than one player.
hhm, that would indicate that we don't have more than 12 legit starters..... that doesn't make sense... the FO is so great with the roster we don't need allocation, trades, acquisitions, etc.... just the draft for us..... oh wait, I'm sorry, I'm just being negative amazing how circular these conversations get
The reasons they are circular is because basically our problems have come down to the same issues over the past few years. And yet, each and every year, we've done nothing to upgrade our roster except to hope for a one-month fix from someone and for draft picks to bail us out.
BTW, we have had 15 players start one game or more for us this year. DC's had 21. Chivas has had 19. Houston 21. FCD has had 23. Those are the five teams that are leading the way for the Shield. See any number that really sticks out?
Its already been made clear that we have the smallest group of starters, so obviously our competitors will have had more players who've started games. That doesn't mean there's any correlation. The fact that the #2 in the currently has the fewest number of starters suggests there ISN'T a correlatio, if anything. We are second in the league on points, so I assume WE'RE one of the successful team - and we're at one end of the scale, as you pointed out. What conclusion does that lead to? Starter burnout seems to be the theory-du-jour. But, looking at how hot DC is right now, who in the league would have beaten them on Sunday in their stadium? We gave it a pretty good shot, leading at 70 minutes. DC hasn't lost an MLS game at home since April and has only been tied twice since then. The Revs clearly need to play with much better mental focus, but I think people are really overreacting to one tough, road game.
Actually it does show a correlation when only one team of the teams with a chance for the Shield has such a low number. There's a good mix number for number of starters at this point (where the DCs and FCDs are), then there's too low of a number, and then there's too high of a number (TFC has 28). So what was the excuse when they came and beat us on our home field? Were they just as hot? If only it was one tough game...
You want excuses or explanations? I only *attempt* the latter. I'm also concerned about the number of mutiple-goals-against games recently, but we have the fewest losses in the league - it needs to be kept in perspective. We've been averaging about 1.5 points per game lately. Not great, but not horrible either.