Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

NESCAC - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 3
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Williams 1,435.4847 1,445.4889 1,440.4781 56.53 65.68 0.217
2nd Bowdoin 1,363.5218 1,366.2444 1,364.8824 52.49 61.93 0.126
3rd Amherst 1,355.5047 1,373.1808 1,364.3141 56.52 58.17 0.125
4th Tufts 1,348.5750 1,345.9884 1,347.2811 53.29 60.80 0.139
5th Middlebury 1,342.4141 1,345.9358 1,344.1738 52.61 57.08 0.112
6th Trinity (CT) 1,304.7337 1,318.4997 1,311.5986 48.03 56.73 0.074
7th Connecticut Col. 1,278.3971 1,287.3806 1,282.8810 47.61 57.42 0.042
8th Wesleyan (CT) 1,213.1556 1,229.6140 1,221.3571 45.38 55.08 -0.005
9th Hamilton 1,203.7940 1,203.8120 1,203.8030 44.06 49.54 -0.042
10th Colby 1,194.1349 1,201.2591 1,197.6917 44.86 52.34 -0.009
11th Bates 1,179.9790 1,202.6792 1,191.2750 44.91 51.04 -0.079

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 Williams 0.3024 42.80 12.57 39.60 45.57 3.16 9.33
2nd Middlebury 0.2377 38.10 14.33 34.21 48.58 4.68 12.61
3rd Tufts 0.2293 36.32 13.38 33.05 50.95 4.04 9.87
4th Trinity (CT) 0.2270 34.02 11.31 31.38 58.72 3.28 9.52
5th Amherst 0.2171 33.95 12.24 31.43 54.75 3.80 8.76
6th Bowdoin 0.2148 35.20 13.72 32.64 52.37 3.38 10.96
7th Wesleyan (CT) 0.2024 35.70 15.46 32.58 51.22 5.05 9.76
8th Connecticut Col. 0.1721 32.30 15.08 30.83 53.11 4.14 12.24
9th Colby 0.1704 32.58 15.54 28.91 56.68 5.52 7.56
10th Bates 0.1339 30.21 16.82 28.39 53.88 6.02 10.71
11th Hamilton 0.1135 29.27 17.92 24.98 59.72 5.02 10.70

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Williams 0.0854 26.91 18.37 24.80 61.03 6.15 6.41
2nd Bowdoin 0.0887 26.40 17.53 24.15 63.28 7.46 7.28
3rd Tufts 0.0908 28.23 19.15 26.65 54.28 6.97 6.50
4th Amherst 0.0920 26.30 17.10 24.25 58.07 5.72 7.65
5th Middlebury 0.1254 28.75 16.20 25.89 55.52 4.68 8.68
6th Connecticut Col. 0.1302 30.05 17.03 27.46 60.20 4.62 7.04
7th Trinity (CT) 0.1531 30.03 14.73 27.09 60.45 5.42 7.16
8th Hamilton 0.1560 30.52 14.92 27.16 59.24 4.82 7.11
9th Colby 0.1799 32.55 14.56 29.16 59.50 5.20 8.50
10th Wesleyan (CT) 0.2070 37.20 16.50 33.11 50.97 4.66 9.53
11th Bates 0.2134 35.57 14.23 32.31 52.64 3.89 10.46

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,297.2487 1,293.1092 1,296.4870 1,301.4583 1,297.0758
Difference -4.1395 -0.7618 4.2096 -0.2306

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Williams 112 894 490 225 238 54.81 4.0 3.8 672 259 148 197 61.46 4.5 3.4
Amherst 95 1,086 604 182 136 55.62 6.0 8.0 886 394 145 158 55.53 6.1 5.6
Tufts 105 1,496 774 217 180 51.74 6.9 8.3 1,295 562 178 209 56.60 7.3 6.2
Bowdoin 108 728 367 261 263 50.41 2.8 2.8 647 279 172 187 56.88 3.8 3.5
Middlebury 89 425 213 192 149 50.12 2.2 2.9 391 178 134 162 54.48 2.9 2.4
Trinity (CT) 91 714 326 200 203 45.66 3.6 3.5 713 329 164 159 53.86 4.3 4.5
Wesleyan (CT) 84 1,230 571 163 200 46.42 7.5 6.2 1,258 594 200 169 52.78 6.3 7.4
Connecticut Col. 99 852 393 198 244 46.13 4.3 3.5 877 413 193 184 52.91 4.5 4.8
Colby 89 327 148 204 223 45.26 1.6 1.5 369 192 165 168 47.97 2.2 2.2
Bates 108 654 273 251 194 41.74 2.6 3.4 790 420 248 223 46.84 3.2 3.5
Hamilton 74 351 144 122 119 41.03 2.9 2.9 422 222 150 157 47.39 2.8 2.7
Conference Average 96 796 391 201 195 48.08 4.0 4.2 756 349 172 179 53.34 4.4 4.2
  • 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 NESCAC

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

64.76

2013-10-05 Amherst, Mass.
Amherst
Tufts
3
1
25
23
15
25
25
18
25
19
GAME

62.77

2013-10-19 Medford, MA
Tufts
Middlebury
3
2
24
26
25
15
15
25
27
25
15
6
GAME

61.87

2013-09-20 Amherst, MA
Amherst
Bowdoin
0
3
26
28
17
25
20
25
GAME

60.75

2013-09-27 Middletown, CT
Wesleyan (CT)
Trinity (CT)
2
3
20
25
25
22
22
25
25
21
11
15
GAME

58.67

2013-11-01 Middletown, CT
Wesleyan (CT)
Amherst
1
3
15
25
19
25
25
20
17
25
GAME

58.27

2013-09-25 Lewiston, Maine
Bates
Bowdoin
1
3
25
19
18
25
20
25
21
25
GAME

57.86

2013-10-04 Middletown, CT
Wesleyan (CT)
Middlebury
3
1
25
22
11
25
25
21
25
22
GAME

57.67

2013-09-20 Medford, MA
Tufts
Trinity (CT)
3
0
25
22
25
20
25
20
GAME

57.56

2013-10-04 Amherst, Mass.
Amherst
Connecticut Col.
3
0
25
14
25
20
25
18
GAME

57.41

2013-11-02 Medford, MA
Tufts
Colby
3
1
25
20
22
25
25
17
26
24

HuskerGeek NESCAC 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 11.3036
2 11.1661
3 8.6482
4 7.5564
5 7.3781
6 7.2394
7 7.1674
8 7.1419
9 7.1119
10 6.7706

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 6.9391
2 5.7631
3 4.9541
4 4.9382
5 4.5964
6 4.5823
7 4.2733
8 3.9294
9 3.8580
10 3.6588

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 6.5910
2 5.8399
3 5.5634
4 5.4030
5 4.3644
6 4.2552
7 4.1662
8 4.0518
9 3.5520
10 3.5201

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2276
2 0.2236
3 0.2221
4 0.1739
5 0.1739
6 0.1718
7 0.1574
8 0.1568
9 0.1419
10 0.1411

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1249
2 0.1210
3 0.1169
4 0.1125
5 0.1068
6 0.0971
7 0.0955
8 0.0931
9 0.0887
10 0.0851

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1159
2 0.1140
3 0.1110
4 0.1067
5 0.1066
6 0.1064
7 0.1008
8 0.1007
9 0.1003
10 0.0999


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