Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

Lone Star - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 2
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Tarleton St. 1,611.6841 1,597.9588 1,604.8068 54.57 68.04 0.206
2nd Angelo St. 1,576.0140 1,535.6242 1,555.6880 50.11 67.10 0.168
3rd West Tex. A&M 1,515.5136 1,511.4122 1,513.4615 50.96 62.27 0.129
4th Tex. A&M-Kingsville 1,521.5180 1,502.6751 1,512.0672 50.20 62.28 0.137
5th Tex. A&M-Commerce 1,504.0450 1,484.4937 1,494.2374 50.10 60.67 0.113
6th Texas Woman's 1,481.6478 1,461.9927 1,471.7875 46.74 61.46 0.086
7th Midwestern St. 1,470.2097 1,449.9187 1,460.0289 46.28 59.54 0.073
8th Western N.M. 1,436.5652 1,424.0795 1,430.3088 44.52 58.41 0.019
9th Eastern N.M. 1,442.5617 1,417.8872 1,430.1712 45.77 57.44 0.044
10th Cameron 1,390.0694 1,377.3960 1,383.7182 43.39 55.78 0.016
11th Tex. Permian Basin 1,369.4993 1,339.1251 1,354.2271 43.48 52.55 -0.026

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 Angelo St. 0.2839 40.97 12.58 38.75 45.01 4.87 7.04
2nd Tarleton St. 0.2839 41.75 13.37 38.82 42.59 5.08 7.30
3rd Tex. A&M-Kingsville 0.2641 39.85 13.44 37.30 46.23 4.89 6.78
4th West Tex. A&M 0.2617 38.71 12.54 36.79 48.10 4.16 6.97
5th Texas Woman's 0.2327 37.49 14.22 35.32 48.86 4.96 6.11
6th Tex. A&M-Commerce 0.2303 37.31 14.29 35.22 47.08 5.11 7.01
7th Midwestern St. 0.2183 36.19 14.36 34.48 48.40 4.72 8.14
8th Eastern N.M. 0.2069 37.91 17.21 35.11 46.63 5.56 7.24
9th Western N.M. 0.2021 35.52 15.31 33.42 49.39 6.57 5.01
10th Cameron 0.1929 34.53 15.24 32.11 50.93 5.62 5.22
11th Tex. Permian Basin 0.1447 31.62 17.14 29.39 52.96 6.51 6.84

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Tarleton St. 0.0781 25.46 17.65 23.71 60.40 6.13 3.89
2nd Angelo St. 0.1157 27.16 15.59 24.39 59.66 5.23 4.50
3rd Tex. A&M-Commerce 0.1174 27.94 16.21 25.96 57.43 6.24 6.30
4th Tex. A&M-Kingsville 0.1275 28.76 16.01 25.90 57.77 4.83 5.30
5th West Tex. A&M 0.1329 29.62 16.33 27.97 55.62 5.32 4.85
6th Midwestern St. 0.1452 30.52 16.00 28.37 54.64 5.80 5.36
7th Texas Woman's 0.1469 30.59 15.90 28.61 56.26 4.61 5.30
8th Eastern N.M. 0.1631 32.19 15.88 29.88 54.03 4.31 6.38
9th Tex. Permian Basin 0.1704 33.73 16.68 30.40 52.63 4.81 5.32
10th Cameron 0.1772 34.47 16.75 31.92 50.12 5.96 5.50
11th Western N.M. 0.1829 34.64 16.36 32.49 51.31 5.24 4.84

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,473.6820 1,472.3854 1,473.1518 1,473.6859 1,473.2263
Difference -1.2966 -0.5303 0.0039 -0.6077

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Tarleton St. 121 2,848 1,432 178 173 50.28 16.0 16.5 2,298 842 98 178 63.36 23.4 12.9
Angelo St. 112 2,594 1,183 156 217 45.61 16.6 12.0 2,284 854 110 157 62.61 20.8 14.5
Tex. A&M-Kingsville 123 2,524 1,170 159 174 46.36 15.9 14.5 2,353 994 150 175 57.76 15.7 13.4
West Tex. A&M 130 2,968 1,372 171 161 46.23 17.4 18.4 2,795 1,193 146 181 57.32 19.1 15.4
Tex. A&M-Commerce 129 2,821 1,299 166 171 46.05 17.0 16.5 2,704 1,167 173 193 56.84 15.6 14.0
Midwestern St. 113 2,461 1,073 178 252 43.60 13.8 9.8 2,463 1,087 130 144 55.87 18.9 17.1
Texas Woman's 124 2,715 1,153 136 201 42.47 20.0 13.5 2,749 1,184 156 194 56.93 17.6 14.2
Eastern N.M. 115 2,330 972 141 198 41.72 16.5 11.8 2,557 1,209 173 190 52.72 14.8 13.5
Western N.M. 103 2,151 868 88 124 40.35 24.4 17.3 2,337 1,076 123 174 53.96 19.0 13.4
Cameron 104 2,141 881 95 156 41.15 22.5 13.7 2,361 1,119 133 173 52.61 17.8 13.6
Tex. Permian Basin 105 2,027 829 123 179 40.90 16.5 11.3 2,377 1,206 134 168 49.26 17.7 14.1
Conference Average 116 2,507 1,112 145 182 44.06 17.9 14.1 2,480 1,085 139 175 56.29 18.2 14.2
  • 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 Lone Star

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

76.95

2017-09-16 Commerce, TX
Tex. A&M-Commerce
Tarleton St.
3
2
25
23
21
25
25
18
27
29
19
17
GAME

75.58

2017-09-20 San Angelo, Texas
Angelo St.
Tarleton St.
1
3
28
26
23
25
23
25
20
25
GAME

74.42

2017-09-29 Kingsville, TX
Tex. A&M-Kingsville
Angelo St.
2
3
25
18
12
25
25
23
23
25
14
16
GAME

73.86

2017-11-30 Denver, CO
Tarleton St.
West Tex. A&M
1
3
11
25
21
25
26
24
19
25
GAME

73.21

2017-09-30 Kingsville, TX
Tex. A&M-Kingsville
Tarleton St.
2
3
18
25
25
19
26
28
25
22
11
15
GAME

72.91

2017-10-21 San Angelo, Texas
Angelo St.
Texas Woman's
3
1
25
20
23
25
25
22
26
24
GAME

72.34

2017-11-16 Stephenville, TX
Angelo St.
Texas Woman's
1
3
22
25
23
25
26
24
19
25
GAME

71.39

2017-11-04 Kingsville, TX
Tex. A&M-Kingsville
West Tex. A&M
3
1
25
22
25
15
22
25
26
24
GAME

71.36

2017-11-17 Stephenville, TX
Tex. A&M-Commerce
Texas Woman's
2
3
23
25
25
20
20
25
25
22
11
15
GAME

71.31

2017-11-16 Stephenville, TX
Tex. A&M-Kingsville
West Tex. A&M
1
3
25
20
16
25
16
25
19
25

HuskerGeek Lone Star All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
S
S

2nd Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
S
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 28.7036
2 27.7917
3 25.8171
4 25.1180
5 23.7901
6 22.9759
7 22.7454
8 22.7389
9 20.4406
10 20.4058

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 18.0092
2 17.9734
3 17.8382
4 14.9987
5 14.9008
6 14.1876
7 13.8012
8 12.3588
9 12.0847
10 11.0759

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 20.4436
2 18.6084
3 17.8941
4 16.2983
5 15.4611
6 15.2761
7 15.2344
8 14.4987
9 13.9056
10 13.5418

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2375
2 0.2243
3 0.2208
4 0.2082
5 0.2015
6 0.1966
7 0.1879
8 0.1834
9 0.1793
10 0.1777

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1525
2 0.1449
3 0.1385
4 0.1330
5 0.1245
6 0.1240
7 0.1140
8 0.1078
9 0.1065
10 0.1023

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1649
2 0.1539
3 0.1494
4 0.1482
5 0.1431
6 0.1421
7 0.1398
8 0.1350
9 0.1344
10 0.1262


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