2024 - 02
2024 - 03
2024 - 04
previous arrow
next arrow

"Gazprom-Ugra": summary through numbers

The Super League venues have cooled down a bit after the season and it's time to sum up the promised results. I just want to warn, that everything written is the personal vision of the author, not the coaching staff, so we immediately make allowances for unprofessionalism and do not take it for the opinion of the club.

In the analysis of the game, I decided to resort to numbers - they, as known, can be very eloquent. But, before diving into their fascinating world, you need to remember about the "lie, big lies and statistics". Individual performance in our ultimate team play speaks volumes, but never broadcast game qualities exhaustively: Nevertheless, the collected data array allows to some extent to judge the strengths and weaknesses of the players and the team as a whole. Let's try to look at the Gazprom-Ugra game through the prism of individual statistical data, taken on the website volleyservice.ru of the agency of the same name.


Since volleyball players spent different amounts of time on the court, it is more objective to take as a basis not the sum of points scored, and their number per unit of playing time is a set. So, Nikita Alekseev with 406 points scored - ninth in the Superleague, but in terms of average points per set is fourteenth (3,98), which is also very, very good.. by the way, Ilya Kovalev, played all 18 matches, by score/set (3,86) – 18th in the league. Behind Kovalev - the abyss, Rajab Shahbanmirzaev 42nd (2,81), Kirill Kostylenko - 72nd (2,00), Yegor Yakutin is 80th (1,84), Dmitry Makarenko - 90th (1,74), Artem Dovgan is 95th (1,67).

As we see, in Gazprom-Ugra during the season there were two pronounced scorers, Alekseev and Kovalev, and the loss of the latter significantly weakened the potential of the team. Shakhbanmirzaev replaced Alekseev well and had a good play-out, but apart from the diagonal at the end of the season, there was no other reliable option for a stable set of points. In many ways, it was this factor that predetermined our team's failure to make it to the playoffs - in the decisive period of the championship, we found ourselves without a reliable removal / replay in the fourth zone.


In terms of points scored in the attack, Alekseev is the seventh player in the Super League (369, efficiency 45%), which speaks of his leading role in the attacking actions of the team and, Alas, underscores in other elements (innings, block). Shahbanmirzaev 29th (earned 237 points with efficiency 49%), Kovalev - 32nd (211, 48%), Makarenko - 47th (155, 38%), Yakutin is 61st (119, 57%), Kostylenko - 62nd (116, 42%), Dovgan - 71st (99, 53%). Note, that middle blockers are known to receive fewer passes, but they usually attack from winning positions, and the percentage of efficiency is always higher.


Yegor Yakutin flashed in the center of the net, included in the top ten blockers of the championship and showed the same result (0,61 set unit) with players of the Russian national team Ilya Vlasov and Ivan Yakovlev. Artem Dovgan closes the fourth ten with an indicator 0,41, Ilya Kovalev - 55th (0,34), Ivan Ropavka - 77th (0,29), Nikita Alekseev - 88th (0,26), Evgeny Rukavishnikov 96th (0,23).

Kastylenka, Makarenko and Lukyanenko with an indicator 0,14 block per set settled between 140 and 150 positions in the Super League. the, that the shortest setter of the Superleague played here on the same level with the players, only talks about, that through Ivan they attacked very often and he nevertheless caught some attacks (12 blocks). But the fourth zone has definitely become problematic in this element as well., especially after the departure of Kovalev.


Gazprom-Ugra has a noticeable failure and lack of a leader at the pitch: Shahbanmirzaev, Makarenko and Kovalev share 46-48 places with 18 aces for everyone. maybe, play Kovalev all season, the situation would be different. In Dovgan 16 aces and a place in the middle of the sixth decade, Nikita Alekseev with 10 aces in 83rd position, Ropavka and Yakutin 9 aces share 88-89 seats.


As for the reception, then Dmitry Makarenko received the maximum load, he became the fourth (after Biryukov, Feoktistov and Podlesnykh) a target for pitchers in the league. Dmitry coped with 628 methods at the middle level, having earned 37% positive and 19% excellent reception. Ilya Kovalev, which arrived 436 feed, It has 44% We repeat - Surgutyan summed up the reception 21% excellent finishing to binder. Our libero, Alexey Kabeshov, accepted 410 times with result 40 and 19% respectively. Kirill Kostylenko is the best with the acceptance rate - 47 and 26% in 315 attempts. At the second libero, Nikita Eremina, 43 and 25% and a hundred tricks less, 217. In general, the average temperature in the hospital, our receivers were close to grandmasters 50% positive reception. It should be noted, that there are only a few players in the Super League (Janutov, Grebennikov, Voronkov, Tyetyukhin, Obmochaev) exceeded this.


But how to evaluate the quality of binders? Not by the number of blocks and aces, it's not their main job.. The quality of broadcasts can be indirectly "digitized" through the percentage of team removal from positive and negative reception. I don't have complete statistics, but the selection made 19 matches from 32, played in the championship, may well be representative.. So here, with a positive reception from Gazprom-Ugra, the average percentage of sales is 56, from the negative 44. Is it a lot or a little? Fine, medium.

There were failed matches like a meeting with the capital "Dynamo", where the realization from the negative reception was only 25% - this can be explained by the power of serving champions. There were 78% from the positive in the play-out home match against Enisey.

Overall good, that Gazprom-Ugra had two diverse binders: both love fast play, but in the actions of Ivan Lukyanenko there is more creativity and non-standard thinking, while Evgeny Rukavishnikov takes his toll at the expense of simulated connections. Often Rukavishnikov created the foundation in the game - or vice versa, destroyed it with not the most successful actions, and Lukyanenko went out to put on a beautiful painting or try to save the situation. A significant limitation was Lukyanenko's low bloc, whose presence on the front line practically guaranteed the opponent an open "corridor" in the fourth zone.

in total

Portrait of "Gazprom-Ugra" in the season 2021/2022 as follows: a strong middle peasant without a stable aggressive serve, trying to compensate for this with fast net play and tenacious defense, as well as attempts to create powerful pressure in the corners due to the limited resources available (remember the transfer of Alekseev to the playoff to Kovalev). After the departure of Kovalev, a certain “draft” was created in the fourth zone, the search for the optimal solution dragged on and cost the team not getting into the playoffs. The result of the season as a whole corresponds to the available resources, and sometimes surpasses them.

Negative results of the season

  • Didn't make the playoffs.
  • Lost both legionnaires during the season.
  • Unstable played the second half of the preliminary part of the championship.

Positive results of the season

  • It turned out to be a reboot of Nikita Alekseev, in the center of the grid "grew" a new leader - Egor Yakutin.
  • Several players from the youth team of the club tried their hand in the Super League.
  • Powerful finish in the play-out created a good mood for the future.