Understanding Fullbacks: Floor and Ceiling Raising
“Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity.” That is Hanson Razor. It has entirely nothing to do with the 2000 or so words you may or may not read in this piece. But it is one of those things I discovered when you get lost in a rabbit hole on YouTube around midnight and 30 seconds later its 5am. It’s completely useless information. But it’s completely information we both have now.
What isn’t completely useless and is actually relevant to this piece are fullbacks.
Fullbacks are arguably (along with central midfielders) the most tactically malleable position in football. Ask them to stay back and tuck in to form a back three and they are essentially an auxiliary centre back. Let them bomb forward and dominate them an entire flank and you have a winger. Politely request they invert rather than overlap and Eureka! A midfielder is born. All that is just position ally. There’s tonnes of other tactical tweaks mangers make to transform their fullbacks and wingbacks from players not quite solid enough to be centre backs or tricky enough to be wingers, to the hub of the team’s creativity or progression.
Knowing this, it’s easy to group them into various sub groups using different criteria. Attacking and defensive. Overlapping and inverted. Wingback and fullback. But what if we grouped fullbacks into archetypes based on how they fit into their teams and how their tendencies and traits elevate or sustain their teams’ performances.
Basically, what if we separated fullbacks into floor raisers and ceiling raisers?
To do that you have to understand the concept of portability. If you have read this piece by OmVAsports , he has done something very similar with attackers. Most of the foundation for this is in his piece targeted at attackers.
Portability is basically the ability of a player to be a part of a team’s achievement irrespective of the environment they are added into. According to Ben Taylor, the most portable players can interface in various circumstances. He was talking about basketball.
Football is different because it requires a very different skill set. And within football still, fullbacks require a very different set of traits, tendencies and tricks to compete at a truly elite level. The more bows in your arrow, the bigger your impact on a club and the better you are in different situations. Thus the more portable you are. Ranking the key attributes by their importance to cream of the crop fullbacks can be tricky due to the how different they are used at the top level.
FLOOR RAISER
Typically a floor raiser has the ability to make a bad team decent or even quite good. Say your team is performing at 70-90%%, a floor raiser pushes you up to 80-90%. They limit variance and help elevate everybody’s game. How though? By making everything flows through them. If you said to a floor raiser “We’re struggling.” Their reply will be along the lines of “I know! Give it to me and follow my lead!” That’s the kind of line you would find in a movie about a typical floor raiser.
They want to be the key decision makers. To do that they will need to be in possession often. That ball dominance tendency inevitably leads to them having high usage. To be at their optimum best they need the others around them to move quickly and intelligently off the ball.
How does this translate to fullbacks when you consider their skill set and their role? How do we identify a good floor raising full back?
Tactically, you are looking for someone who is secure in possession. The type of player who is willing to serve as an outlet or option for their team when they are struggling to retain possession or sustain pressure. Versatility is important too. In attackers it would be the ability to be deployed in left, right or centre. However, for a fullback it implies being comfortable inverting, overlapping, underlapping etc. Statistically, floor raising fullbacks would likely be the one of the primary creators as well as ball progressors in their team. The one man ball progression and chance creation machine.
THE BIG QUESTION THEN BECOMES, WHO IS THE BEST FLOOR RASING FULLBACK IN FOOTBALL CURRENTLY?
The best examples at an elite level are probably Liverpool’s Trent Alexander-Arnold and Manchester City’s Joao Cancelo.
Both are first and second for touches in the Premier League(2711 and 2346). The next nearest fullback is Cucurella with almost a thousand less touches. Both ball dominant players for sure but also very progressive. Cancelo is top for progressive carries in the league and Trent is the next fullback on the list. One glimpse at their percentile ranks on fbref for possession and progressive metrics paints this picture. They are reliable in possession and versatile enough to perform different tacticalroles for their sides. Cancelo can even play the opposite flank.
Creatively, both are on a different level. For Liverpool, their academy graduate is definitely their creator-in-chief. He’s on course to finish his fourth season in a row with the most assists in the league for Liverpool. A feat that is very achievable when you have usage as high as 19%.
The value they add in possession is superb, Trent especially. However, a much underrated trait is their ability to play the pass before the assist. That’s evident in their facilitating value.
Pass networks and maps are utterly useless and nobody uses them in real analytics at real football clubs (Disclaimer: This may not be my personal opinion or that of my completely fictional employers.) But one glance at a Between The Postspass map from most City or Liverpool games would be enough to indicate Cancelo and Trent’s ball dominance. The sheer size of the nodes (circles) relative to their teammates is a good indicator. Cancelo even has the most centrality for City in this example. Centrality is basically a mathematical concept that postulates the more central a node is (Cancelo) in this case, the closer they are to other nodes (i.e. his City teammates).
These player cards fromMacrofootball are a perfect summary of both players.
Notice how they are both classed as wide playmakers. Notice again their high usage for Pep and Klopp’s juggernauts. And finally, it’s no coincidence they both rank highfor possession involvement as well as creating. Typical of floor raising.
CEILING RAISER
On the other hand a ceiling raiser makes a good team great. Or at least they should be able to. If you are performing at 70-90%, adding a ceiling raiser to the equation gets you 70-100%. They are potential raisers. But unlike floor raisers not by elevatingeverybody’s game. How though? Rather by ensuring attackingefficiency and effectiveness without with their minimal time on the ball. If you told to a ceiling raiser “We’re struggling.” Their reply will be along the lines of “I know! Give me the ball when you spot my run into the behind their backline!”
They want to be the ones to get on the end of things. There to punctuate moves rather than be involved in the rigorous buildup. For this to be possible, the players need to be extremely intelligent when they are not in possession. Imagine a complimentary piece who doesn’t quite work on its own but fit it into a bigger puzzle and it makes it perfect. Thus to show their full ability they are best paired with other elite level talent preferably more dominant on-ball players.
Interpreting and identifying this archetype of player for the fullback position is tricky. I can admit to initially struggling to define these players which made it hard to identify them distinctly. Identifying them in tactics is the key. Ceiling raising fullbacks would tend not to be as involved in buildup. They are actively looking to convert possessions into high quality chances. They are extremely decisive once on the ball and are constantly on the move to create separation from the opposition and simultaneously give team mates an ideal option to lead to chances. This archetype is primarily about intelligence and exploiting weaknesses they identify. They could be versatile and creative like floor raisers but the key difference is they don’t achieve this by holding onto the ball but rather by converting every service they get receive to a goal opportunity.
SO, WHO IS THE BEST EXAMPLE OF CEILING RASING FROM FULLBACK IN FOOTBALL CURRENTLY?
The prime example is Eintracht Frankfurt’s Filipe Kostic. Kostic is a former winger turned wingback for the German side. Once he’s on the ball he’s looking to create goal scoring opportunities rather than consolidate possession. His delivery from crosses is superb and consistent. His ability to put himself in position to create goals can raise the potential of a team. But he can’t do it entirely on his own and that’s why he finds himself in this archetype. Without much involvement in possession, the Serbian often relies on his teammates finding him high on the left to be effective.
The most intriguing ceiling raising season from a wingback recently however is most likely from the Bundesliga as well. Silas Mvumpa, formerly known as Silas Wamangituka of Stuttgart, took most of the traits and tendencies of ceiling raiser to an extreme. Before his ACL tear he started the 2020/21 season on fire. He took the “retaining offensive effectiveness without many touches” personal. The man was taking 1.88 shots per game from only 38.9 touches with 2.86 shot creating actions per 90. For context Lewandowski has averaged 4.65 shots from 37.5 touches a game since 2016. That kind of decisiveness once the ball is at your feet is key to his ability to push his team to the next level.
Both players player cards tell story much better. Classed as wide attackers but with vastly different roles admist their similarities with low possession involvement. Kostic still has high usage with minimal touches thus retaining offensive impact and efficiency without ball dominance. Typical of ceiling raisers.
But an example of ceiling raising that might be fresh in the memory is Leonardo Spinazzola for Italy at Euro 2020.
Italy were a patient possession side for most of the tournament but Spinazzola did not see as much off that possession as most of his teammates. He was seventh for touches amongst players with at least 180 minutes. That’s understandable in a side with Jorginhoand Verratti. But once he got the ball, he was looking to get his team and into dangerous situations. For key metrics likeprogressive carries, carries into the final third, carries into the penalty area, shot creating actions (4.05) and goal creating actions (0.48) he’s top 3 for the team per 90. I reiterate that pass maps have been pronounced as garbage that can contains no valuable information by the gatekeepers of football.
But in this one of Italy vs. Belgium you can see he’s node is relatively tiny compared to his teammates. Yet he has the most xG chain. xG chain is the total xG of every possession a player is involved in. So without dominating the ball much the Roma left back finished the game with the most involvement for chances created. That ability to be crucial to a team’s success without constantly needing to be on the ball is what sets ceiling raisers apart.
CAN YOU HAVE IT ALL?
Can you really be that guy? Well yes. Not because you are simultaneously a floor and ceiling raiser but rather because you are comfortable switching between the archetypes. That implies you have a more complete skill set than most. It could be on a game to game basis or maybe by playing a different role for club and country. To be that guy, you need to be a lot more portable i.e. you need to be able to thrive with ever-changing situations on the pitch with relative ease.
Reece James.
The Chelsea defender is a fairly complete footballer. His physical and technical attributes allow him to play in a variety of positions to an elite or just below level. He brings that positional flexibility into his interpretation of his role at fullback or wingback. James is adept at dominating the right flank with overlapping runs but also coming inside to help in central midfield. Late underlapping runs from deep into the box to score goals are another weapon in his arsenal.
The Chelsea academy graduate is secure in possession and is comfortable being tasked with progression and chance creation for Chelsea. His numbers speak for themselves. But at the same time he’s capable of turning a game on its head without seeing much of the ball. On the ball his delivery from wide areas, dribbling ability, coolness in possession and the occasional creative pass are excellent. Sprinkle some off the ball ability to get into positions to change games both offensively and you can see why he is a more portable player.
It is with deep regret I present you anther set of fraudulent pass maps. These games are very different. In the Champions League final Chelsea had 40% possession while against Arsenal they had 65%.
Against City with Chelsea seeing less of the ball he holds his position more and focuses on distribution and consolidating possession for his team. Keeping things moving rather than creating. He finishes that final with just one key pass.A floor raising performance. Arsenal is a different ball game. Chelsea have a lot of the ball soo they’ll require intelligent of the ball movement to break Arsenal down. Both Chelsea goals come from him making smart decision off the ball. A ceiling restating performance ironically with ball dominance.
FINAL THOUGHTS
It is always difficult to write something entirely new. And while this really is not since I had plenty basketball pieces, all the equivalent of pub experts on reddit and OmVAsports pieces to soak knowledge from, it’s not perfect. I very much welcome discussion over my definitions of the archetypes. Also, there is room for an archetype that is a bit of both. But defining it distinctly enough to know what to look for was a struggle. Now might also be a good time to point out that the examples do not necessarily mean that player fits into that category like a glove 100% of the time.
Comments
Post a Comment