Jamie Carragher and Defensive Positioning

Consider this an addendum to Noel's depressingly unsurprising post on Liverpool's defensive statistics with and without Carragher over at Liverpool Offside.

The numbers speak for themselves, but I've seen multiple people (not in Noel's post, by the way) credit Liverpool's inferior record with Carragher to Liverpool having to play a deeper back line thanks to Carra's notorious lack of pace. It's become something of a pet peeve of mine, because answers usually aren't that easy.

So, using the available average position diagrams from the Daily Telegraph match reports [they're missing v QPR (without Carra), v Villa (with Carra), and at Blackburn (without), because they're the Daily Telegraph and refuse to make anything easy or sensical], I thought I'd see if that was the case.

  

The fullbacks seem to get forward slightly more without Carragher, especially on Carragher's side, but not incredibly significantly. All in all, the charts look relatively similar expect for the white-outlined circles denoting where Carragher was. So let's get rid of the fullbacks.

  

That's better. And yep, looks deeper. But, again, not as much as I expected. There's a wider range of average center-back positions without Carragher in the line-up, but more interesting than how deep they play is how close together they are. I suspect having both center-backs nearer to one another, which suggests they're working better as a unit, is more meaningful than how deep either defends.

There were two matches where Carragher played notably deeper than his defensive partner: against Bolton and Wolves. Liverpool won both. The deepest Liverpool's center-backs played came at Chelsea, without Carragher in the line-up; Skrtel's average position is nearly inside the penalty box. And yes, Liverpool won that game too. So please, let's stop the focus on how "deep" Liverpool's defense is. The above suggests that isn't the alpha or omega.

Carragher has a tendency to exacerbate multiple problems in Liverpool's defense. That he's played so often borders on the unforgivable, even if there are excuses for individual games (it's Everton, it's away from Anfield, etc, etc). But crediting problems to a single factor, such as others having to play deeper because of said lack of pace, is far too simplistic. And might not even be true. As with everything else in football, defensive positioning depends on multiple factors – the other defenders on the pitch and the opposition, most notably. Often, it's not how deep Liverpool's defense plays. Who plays may well be, though.

2011-12 Turning Points

Lucas Injury
• 1.77 points per game before, 1.05 after [-0.62 PPG]
• 1.31 goals per game before, 1.05 after [-0.26 GPG]
• 0.92 goals conceded per game before, 1.11 after [+0.19 GCPG]

Suarez Suspension
• 1.72 points per game before, 1.40 during [-0.32 PPG]
• 1.17 goals per game before, 1.40 during [+0.23 GPG]
• 0.78 goals conceded per game before, 1.40 during [+0.62 GCPG]

Carling Cup Final and Agger Injury
• 1.56 points per game before, 0.50 after [-1.06 PPG]
• 1.16 goals per game before, 1.17 after [+0.01 GPG]
• 0.92 goals conceded per game before, 1.67 after [+0.75 GCPG]

All three are terrifying, but the effects of the Carling Cup final hangover and, more importantly, Agger's injury are by far the scariest. Liverpool have only played six league matches since, but are averaging a point less per game and conceding 0.75 more goals per game. Having Johnson and Kelly absent for most of those certainly hasn't helped, but Agger is the the biggest miss. Skrtel may have been Liverpool's player of the season – at least before this recent stretch – but Daniel Agger is by far Liverpool's most important defender. As Bass Tuned to Red wrote earlier this week, Liverpool have conceded a league goal every 129.7 minutes with Agger on the pitch, and a league goal every 58.9 minutes when he has been absent. Yikes.

Lucas' injury is almost as significant. Liverpool's record in the 13 games prior to his injury: 6W-5D-2L. Liverpool's record in the subsequent 18: 5W-4D-9L. Fewer goals scored per game and more goals conceded, although it's slightly surprising to see a bigger difference in goals scored rather than conceded. But Lucas' as the metronomic base for Liverpool's attacks is just as important, if not more so, than Lucas as the tough tackling defensive midfielder.

Finally, Suarez's suspension. Five matches, from Newcastle at home through Wolves away, returning as a substitute against Tottenham. Liverpool actually scored more goals per game during the matches Suarez missed. Carroll started as a lone striker in three: the two matches where Liverpool scored three – wins against Newcastle and Wolves – as well as the 0-3 loss at City. Carroll and Bellamy partnered in the loss at Bolton, linking up for the lone goal, while Kuyt started up front in the 3-4-2-1 scoreless draw against Stoke. However, Liverpool's goals conceded tally rose dramatically during that span, mostly thanks to conceding three against City and Bolton, both featuring Liverpool's first choice back four of Johnson-Skrtel-Agger-Enrique. It's hard to credit that to Suarez's absence, but I suspect (without proof) that opponents are more hesitant to send multiple attackers forward with the ever-dangerous Uruguayan lurking off the shoulder of the last defender.

Missing key players for long to extra-long stretches isn't a good enough excuse for this season's horrors. Liverpool still scored too few goals, conceded frustratingly in aberrant draws, and found new and inventive ways to drop points before any of these three turning points. However, all three absences, as well as the post-Carling Cup letdown, do help explain the increasingly diminishing returns during this horror campaign.