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. 1,659.0425 1,656.9524 1,657.9971 55.88 66.27 0.205
2nd Tex. A&M-Commerce 1,632.0115 1,615.6691 1,623.8197 53.01 65.13 0.169
3rd Angelo St. 1,601.6220 1,591.7235 1,596.6650 51.90 64.23 0.160
4th West Tex. A&M 1,558.8310 1,551.6364 1,555.2295 48.26 62.98 0.100
5th Texas Woman's 1,551.0744 1,545.2924 1,548.1807 50.19 60.21 0.090
6th Tex. A&M-Kingsville 1,519.5429 1,508.9780 1,514.2512 47.83 59.97 0.076
7th Eastern N.M. 1,499.9884 1,485.9739 1,492.9647 47.27 58.03 0.061
8th Tex. Permian Basin 1,486.6354 1,483.3417 1,484.9876 45.75 58.49 0.039
9th Western N.M. 1,479.5782 1,471.6323 1,475.5999 45.11 58.69 0.021
10th MSU Texas 1,425.8644 1,433.6457 1,429.7497 43.44 54.94 -0.037
11th Cameron 1,432.1274 1,422.9452 1,427.5289 42.38 55.72 -0.006

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 Tarleton St. 0.3028 41.62 11.34 38.39 45.18 3.45 7.38
2nd Tex. A&M-Commerce 0.2729 42.46 15.16 40.17 40.03 5.74 6.87
3rd Angelo St. 0.2525 38.86 13.60 36.22 47.90 4.46 8.12
4th West Tex. A&M 0.2331 35.84 12.53 33.72 51.06 4.49 5.73
5th Tex. A&M-Kingsville 0.2220 37.76 15.56 36.03 47.93 4.79 6.03
6th Texas Woman's 0.2199 36.13 14.14 33.88 50.69 3.94 6.33
7th Eastern N.M. 0.2034 36.60 16.26 33.98 47.05 5.58 7.22
8th Tex. Permian Basin 0.1947 33.79 14.32 31.42 53.40 4.97 6.32
9th Cameron 0.1831 33.69 15.38 31.55 52.67 4.98 5.56
10th Western N.M. 0.1806 34.61 16.55 32.78 48.89 6.70 5.92
11th MSU Texas 0.1421 32.79 18.58 30.88 51.45 4.80 6.39

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Angelo St. 0.0926 27.07 17.81 25.05 59.01 6.22 5.29
2nd Tarleton St. 0.0973 28.13 18.40 26.24 55.81 7.84 5.09
3rd Tex. A&M-Commerce 0.1044 27.04 16.60 25.12 58.77 6.09 5.27
4th Texas Woman's 0.1299 28.23 15.24 26.35 59.00 4.47 5.33
5th West Tex. A&M 0.1332 28.00 14.69 26.07 58.96 4.66 5.48
6th Eastern N.M. 0.1421 31.23 17.02 27.66 54.41 5.05 5.97
7th Tex. A&M-Kingsville 0.1461 30.43 15.83 28.17 56.36 5.98 5.18
8th Tex. Permian Basin 0.1555 31.37 15.82 29.21 53.96 5.39 5.79
9th Western N.M. 0.1598 30.67 14.69 28.92 56.29 4.66 4.39
10th MSU Texas 0.1789 34.85 16.97 32.47 50.94 5.87 6.41
11th Cameron 0.1894 34.45 15.52 32.00 51.75 5.79 5.17

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,527.9067 1,524.6054 1,523.9827 1,519.1228 1,523.9044
Difference -3.3014 -3.9241 -8.7840 -5.3365

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. 129 3,054 1,558 193 137 51.02 15.8 22.3 2,506 974 129 199 61.13 19.4 12.6
Angelo St. 120 2,709 1,299 192 268 47.95 14.1 10.1 2,397 970 127 173 59.53 18.9 13.9
Tex. A&M-Commerce 146 3,312 1,580 188 233 47.71 17.6 14.2 2,983 1,218 165 229 59.17 18.1 13.0
Texas Woman's 123 2,656 1,243 144 192 46.80 18.4 13.8 2,548 1,121 140 147 56.01 18.2 17.3
West Tex. A&M 120 2,623 1,158 123 119 44.15 21.3 22.0 2,554 1,083 142 163 57.60 18.0 15.7
Tex. A&M-Kingsville 135 2,910 1,304 152 201 44.81 19.1 14.5 2,883 1,277 153 198 55.71 18.8 14.6
Tex. Permian Basin 114 2,434 1,056 136 162 43.39 17.9 15.0 2,499 1,129 149 188 54.82 16.8 13.3
Eastern N.M. 116 2,378 1,028 146 184 43.23 16.3 12.9 2,512 1,169 150 152 53.46 16.7 16.5
Western N.M. 112 2,339 966 117 162 41.30 20.0 14.4 2,502 1,146 115 193 54.20 21.8 13.0
Cameron 118 2,386 957 116 171 40.11 20.6 14.0 2,713 1,301 150 214 52.05 18.1 12.7
MSU Texas 99 1,998 794 106 144 39.74 18.8 13.9 2,333 1,156 151 184 50.45 15.5 12.7
Conference Average 121 2,618 1,177 147 179 44.56 18.2 15.2 2,585 1,140 143 185 55.83 18.2 14.1
  • 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 Lone Star

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

79.30

2018-09-08 Stephenville, TX
Tarleton St.
Tex. A&M-Commerce
3
2
22
25
28
26
21
25
25
21
15
8
GAME

78.24

2018-11-10 Stephenville, TX
Tarleton St.
Tex. A&M-Commerce
1
3
25
23
17
25
22
25
27
29
GAME

77.03

2018-10-05 Commerce, TX
Tex. A&M-Commerce
West Tex. A&M
3
2
23
25
23
25
25
21
25
23
15
5
GAME

75.68

2018-11-17 Stephenville, TX
Tarleton St.
Tex. A&M-Commerce
3
1
25
21
23
25
25
16
28
26
GAME

74.93

2018-09-07 San Angelo, Tx
Angelo St.
Tex. A&M-Commerce
3
2
25
27
22
25
25
16
25
19
15
12
GAME

74.71

2018-11-03 Canyon, Texas
West Tex. A&M
Tex. A&M-Commerce
1
3
19
25
20
25
28
26
13
25
GAME

74.63

2018-09-08 San Angelo, Tx
Angelo St.
Texas Woman's
3
1
26
24
25
18
24
26
25
22
GAME

74.41

2018-11-02 Portales, N.M.
Eastern N.M.
Tex. A&M-Commerce
2
3
29
31
25
22
21
25
25
23
10
15
GAME

74.24

2018-10-19 San Angelo, TX
Angelo St.
West Tex. A&M
3
2
23
25
25
18
25
19
18
25
15
9
GAME

73.57

2018-10-13 Deming, NM
Tex. A&M-Kingsville
Western N.M.
3
2
25
22
25
27
25
15
23
25
15
13

HuskerGeek Lone Star All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
D
S

2nd Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
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 27.8136
2 27.6751
3 24.5572
4 24.4429
5 22.3356
6 22.2636
7 21.1101
8 21.0694
9 20.5747
10 20.4619

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 19.7006
2 15.9386
3 15.1062
4 14.2365
5 13.7131
6 13.1509
7 12.6508
8 11.2643
9 10.4043
10 10.3769

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 21.0724
2 20.0705
3 20.0583
4 19.6578
5 17.9296
6 17.2701
7 16.5948
8 16.5777
9 14.0504
10 12.5707

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2318
2 0.2232
3 0.1988
4 0.1895
5 0.1858
6 0.1831
7 0.1796
8 0.1767
9 0.1759
10 0.1715

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1589
2 0.1328
3 0.1241
4 0.1186
5 0.1087
6 0.0988
7 0.0981
8 0.0966
9 0.0909
10 0.0865

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1644
2 0.1638
3 0.1632
4 0.1521
5 0.1519
6 0.1443
7 0.1431
8 0.1405
9 0.1339
10 0.1063


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