It's amazing now to what degree every team charts every aspect of the game.
Since this has been a recurring (or consistent, or maybe even defining) problem for recent LV teams, I would love to know how our staff breaks down turnovers, and if that has revealed any pattern.
For example, Passing Turnovers could theoretically be categorized and broken down as:
Forced--too well defended, --too small a window, --before the receiver was ready, etc.
Inaccurate--too high, --too low, --behind, --ahead, etc.
Accurate but...--telegraphed, --lacking velocity, --with too much velocity for the distance, --accurate to where the receiver should have been, --accurate to where the passer hoped the receiver would be, --mishandled by the receiver, etc.
Brains and eyes are tricky.
But certain clumping of turnover data might indicate some common factor, like more players seeing what they hope or expect to see rather than what's actually there, or players being more aware of their teammates' positioning than defenders positioning. Or maybe we just happen to have recruited a high percentage of players with lower aptitudes in spatial reasoning (year-after-year).
Whatever the reason that accounts for this team characteristic, it's surely more than just lack of drills or discipline in practice. Our coaches have too much experience to have let this go un-remedied, if that was all it took.