Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

CCIW - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 3
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Carthage 1,553.6048 1,550.1902 1,551.8966 64.09 72.50 0.321
2nd Millikin 1,494.6441 1,488.3954 1,491.5165 59.38 69.01 0.283
3rd Elmhurst 1,487.4563 1,473.2508 1,480.3365 59.44 68.64 0.280
4th Augustana (IL) 1,434.6914 1,421.7261 1,428.1940 54.56 63.98 0.199
5th Ill. Wesleyan 1,396.1467 1,403.8006 1,399.9684 53.73 66.16 0.184
6th Wheaton (IL) 1,379.2446 1,380.8583 1,380.0512 54.06 60.22 0.153
7th North Central (IL) 1,378.8384 1,363.8215 1,371.3094 54.16 60.82 0.130
8th North Park 1,224.1644 1,220.5682 1,222.3650 45.15 50.19 -0.038

ViPR Adjusted Offenses and Defenses are adjusted to expected values against an average team in the same division.

ViPR Division Adjusted Offenses

Rnk. Team Hit% Kill% HE% AST% O_DIG% O_BLK% ACE%
1st Millikin 0.3347 46.11 12.64 42.25 39.90 3.80 10.37
2nd Elmhurst 0.3267 46.25 13.58 42.23 42.25 2.76 10.76
3rd Carthage 0.3216 44.74 12.59 40.93 43.67 2.93 10.82
4th Augustana (IL) 0.2777 39.07 11.30 35.18 49.10 3.82 11.48
5th Ill. Wesleyan 0.2623 38.20 11.97 35.65 50.34 4.32 9.45
6th Wheaton (IL) 0.2425 38.80 14.55 36.11 51.74 3.24 10.16
7th North Central (IL) 0.2079 37.18 16.39 34.14 49.97 4.26 11.16
8th North Park 0.1395 31.12 17.17 27.59 56.94 5.58 12.19

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Carthage 0.0005 19.06 19.01 18.51 65.56 5.86 5.31
2nd Elmhurst 0.0467 23.53 18.87 22.02 60.58 6.88 4.40
3rd Millikin 0.0516 23.18 18.01 21.11 63.83 6.04 3.76
4th North Central (IL) 0.0778 25.47 17.70 24.52 59.01 5.52 6.10
5th Ill. Wesleyan 0.0786 24.04 16.18 22.33 56.70 4.60 4.24
6th Augustana (IL) 0.0789 23.81 15.92 21.49 64.67 5.38 4.84
7th Wheaton (IL) 0.0896 27.20 18.24 25.73 58.82 6.63 7.37
8th North Park 0.1777 32.17 14.40 28.60 57.12 2.97 9.55

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,415.7047 1,425.2293 1,422.1375 1,414.0812 1,419.2882
Difference 9.5246 6.4328 -1.6235 4.7780

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Carthage 144 2,594 1,384 255 245 53.35 10.2 10.6 1,998 753 181 239 62.31 11.0 8.4
Millikin 150 2,935 1,436 267 350 48.93 11.0 8.4 2,558 1,046 162 272 59.11 15.8 9.4
Elmhurst 150 3,259 1,556 267 362 47.75 12.2 9.0 2,991 1,262 184 225 57.81 16.3 13.3
Ill. Wesleyan 111 1,073 497 165 227 46.32 6.5 4.7 1,012 428 156 209 57.71 6.5 4.8
Augustana (IL) 113 1,049 499 193 275 47.57 5.4 3.8 985 429 113 216 56.45 8.7 4.6
North Central (IL) 120 1,806 869 223 193 48.12 8.1 9.4 1,785 839 179 238 53.00 10.0 7.5
Wheaton (IL) 119 1,784 767 179 131 42.99 10.0 13.6 2,033 1,028 226 199 49.43 9.0 10.2
North Park 107 1,086 461 192 214 42.45 5.7 5.1 1,380 774 226 215 43.91 6.1 6.4
Conference Average 127 1,948 934 218 250 47.18 8.6 8.1 1,843 820 178 227 54.97 10.4 8.1
  • Sets - Team Sets Played
  • S - Serves
  • SP - Service Points
  • SA - Service Aces
  • SE - Service Errors
  • SP% - Service Point Percentage
  • S/SA - Serves Per Service Ace
  • S/SE - Serves Per Service Error
  • OS - Opponent Serves
  • SPA - Service Points Allowed
  • SAA - Service Aces Allowed
  • SEA - Service Errors Against
  • SO% - Team Sideout Percentage
  • OS/SAA - Serves Per Ace Allowed
  • OS/SEA - Serves Per Error Against

The Best Games in the CCIW

Game Link EPIC Game Date Location Teams Sets Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 4 Set 5
GAME

71.96

2014-11-04 Decatur, Ill.
Millikin
Elmhurst
1
3
25
27
23
25
25
15
23
25
GAME

71.36

2014-11-08 Kenosha, Wis.
Carthage
Millikin
3
2
25
18
25
19
21
25
24
26
15
6
GAME

69.34

2014-10-07 Kenosha, Wis.
Carthage
Millikin
3
1
25
14
25
22
23
25
25
21
GAME

68.48

2014-11-07 Kenosha, Wis.
Carthage
Elmhurst
3
2
25
17
25
16
23
25
22
25
15
9
GAME

68.17

2014-10-17 Kenosha, Wis.
Carthage
Elmhurst
3
1
25
17
25
23
26
28
25
17
GAME

67.77

2014-11-05 Naperville, Ill.
North Central (IL)
Ill. Wesleyan
3
2
25
23
25
19
17
25
22
25
15
13
GAME

66.97

2014-10-22 Bloomington, Ill.
Ill. Wesleyan
Elmhurst
3
1
25
22
25
21
23
25
25
21
GAME

65.61

2014-09-30 Elmhurst, Ill.
Elmhurst
Augustana (IL)
3
1
29
27
25
11
22
25
25
16
GAME

65.60

2014-10-08 Elmhurst, Ill.
Elmhurst
Wheaton (IL)
0
3
23
25
23
25
26
28
GAME

65.30

2014-10-21 Kenosha, Wis.
Carthage
Augustana (IL)
3
1
25
18
20
25
25
8
25
18

HuskerGeek CCIW All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
S
S

2nd Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
A
D
S

Player of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

Attacker of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

Setter of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

Defensive Player of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

WPA

Rk. Name Team WPA
1 33.0868
2 32.2111
3 31.0922
4 23.8254
5 18.3647
6 16.7215
7 16.5190
8 15.1814
9 15.1725
10 15.1698

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 23.6506
2 20.9948
3 16.6088
4 16.2418
5 11.7180
6 11.2587
7 10.4283
8 9.7055
9 8.1154
10 8.0375

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 16.2822
2 14.8504
3 12.8523
4 12.6596
5 12.1353
6 12.0920
7 10.2735
8 9.9349
9 9.3493
10 8.5877

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2605
2 0.2268
3 0.2159
4 0.2146
5 0.1955
6 0.1806
7 0.1786
8 0.1489
9 0.1324
10 0.1304

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1666
2 0.1653
3 0.1496
4 0.1128
5 0.0966
6 0.0941
7 0.0924
8 0.0887
9 0.0861
10 0.0819

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1238
2 0.1158
3 0.1153
4 0.1131
5 0.1039
6 0.1031
7 0.1014
8 0.1005
9 0.0952
10 0.0948


Explanations

Conference Strength – The Conference Strength table has two parts.  The first row is a list of averages of the scores for a selection of teams in the conference ranging from all of them under the heading “Average” to an average of teams in the conference if we remove the top and bottom three teams.  This is designed to check if a conference is propped up by its elite teams of held down by its weakest teams.  The Composite score on the far right is an average of those scores.  It is a weighted score where the middle teams have a higher value than the edge teams.  The second row containing difference is simply a measure of how different removing the edge teams makes the conference from its initial average.  If the numbers are positive, then removing the edge teams increases the conferences rating.  If a value grows from the value before it, then the team removed at the bottom of the ratings was rated farther outside of the mean than the team removed at the top of the ratings.  It was weighing the average down so to speak.  The Composite difference at the far right is simply an average of the differences.

The Best Conference Games – A short list of the best games played between two members of the conference which is calculated using the EPIC score of each game.  EPIC score is essentially very simple amounting to adding the teams combined ViPR Rating and the total Win Probability Added scored by each team.

All-Conference Teams – All-conference teams are calculated using Win Probability Added per Set Played and the quality of the team that the player plays on. Team quality is included because better teams tend to have better players and more of them.  This often means that players on better teams have fewer opportunities than standouts on lesser teams.

Awards Lists – Each awards list uses the same formula that is used to calculate All-Conference Teams, and decides based on the focus of the list.  Player of the Year has no limitation on how the player score is added up. While Attacker of the Year must have a higher attack score than any other metric.  Similarly Setter and Defensive Player must acquire most of their score through those metrics.

HuskerGeek
HuskerGeek