Nerdly Nebraska.
2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders
Sport | School | Rating |
---|---|---|
ViPR D1 Volleyball | Wisconsin | 1,711.3731 |
Sport | School | Rating |
---|---|---|
ViPR D1 Volleyball | Wisconsin | 1,711.3731 |
Rnk. | Team | Résumé | Recent | ViPR | Adj SP% | Adj SO% | Adj. Hit Mar. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | Williams | 1,426.8588 | 1,414.9732 | 1,420.9036 | 52.37 | 66.80 | 0.183 |
2nd | Bowdoin | 1,398.4398 | 1,387.5881 | 1,393.0034 | 55.83 | 62.30 | 0.179 |
3rd | Tufts | 1,383.1887 | 1,399.4988 | 1,391.3198 | 56.82 | 61.04 | 0.171 |
4th | Amherst | 1,355.7348 | 1,371.2626 | 1,363.4766 | 56.39 | 59.84 | 0.140 |
5th | Middlebury | 1,294.1941 | 1,301.5496 | 1,297.8666 | 48.58 | 60.69 | 0.073 |
6th | Connecticut Col. | 1,261.3895 | 1,263.1210 | 1,262.2550 | 45.13 | 52.93 | 0.051 |
7th | Colby | 1,253.8319 | 1,258.6760 | 1,256.2516 | 47.38 | 51.58 | 0.043 |
8th | Hamilton | 1,235.9234 | 1,240.9364 | 1,238.4274 | 49.20 | 55.18 | 0.025 |
9th | Trinity (CT) | 1,222.6288 | 1,228.9893 | 1,225.8049 | 34.84 | 48.04 | 0.017 |
10th | Wesleyan (CT) | 1,207.5777 | 1,219.5614 | 1,213.5548 | 46.90 | 55.26 | -0.007 |
11th | Bates | 1,159.2808 | 1,171.7569 | 1,165.5022 | 45.35 | 50.03 | -0.100 |
ViPR Adjusted Offenses and Defenses are adjusted to expected values against an average team in the same division.
Rnk. | Team | Hit% | Kill% | HE% | AST% | O_DIG% | O_BLK% | ACE% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | Williams | 0.2883 | 41.18 | 12.35 | 37.83 | 45.91 | 3.31 | 9.93 |
2nd | Bowdoin | 0.2640 | 38.84 | 12.44 | 35.62 | 50.12 | 3.93 | 10.03 |
3rd | Tufts | 0.2440 | 38.46 | 14.06 | 35.02 | 49.52 | 3.61 | 9.62 |
4th | Amherst | 0.2382 | 35.52 | 11.70 | 32.45 | 52.86 | 3.38 | 9.94 |
5th | Colby | 0.2001 | 33.76 | 13.75 | 29.45 | 56.88 | 4.84 | 11.82 |
6th | Middlebury | 0.1929 | 33.70 | 14.41 | 31.90 | 49.41 | 3.97 | 8.81 |
7th | Trinity (CT) | 0.1823 | 29.64 | 11.42 | 26.86 | 55.54 | 4.95 | 8.63 |
8th | Connecticut Col. | 0.1814 | 32.83 | 14.70 | 29.81 | 51.13 | 4.01 | 7.24 |
9th | Wesleyan (CT) | 0.1635 | 32.66 | 16.31 | 30.70 | 55.26 | 4.01 | 8.74 |
10th | Hamilton | 0.1628 | 31.73 | 15.45 | 27.52 | 54.28 | 3.50 | 8.22 |
11th | Bates | 0.1043 | 28.39 | 17.96 | 26.80 | 55.59 | 4.01 | 12.20 |
Rnk. | Team | O_Hit% | O_Kill% | O_HE% | O_AST% | DIG% | BLK% | O_ACE% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | Tufts | 0.0734 | 26.90 | 19.57 | 25.29 | 60.23 | 7.57 | 6.14 |
2nd | Bowdoin | 0.0853 | 26.67 | 18.14 | 24.64 | 60.81 | 6.93 | 6.21 |
3rd | Amherst | 0.0981 | 26.92 | 17.11 | 25.55 | 58.34 | 4.05 | 7.85 |
4th | Williams | 0.1054 | 27.63 | 17.09 | 25.14 | 58.88 | 5.56 | 3.27 |
5th | Middlebury | 0.1203 | 29.13 | 17.10 | 26.84 | 51.87 | 5.02 | 4.67 |
6th | Connecticut Col. | 0.1305 | 29.67 | 16.62 | 27.57 | 57.62 | 5.46 | 7.77 |
7th | Hamilton | 0.1382 | 30.41 | 16.58 | 27.03 | 57.27 | 6.28 | 8.91 |
8th | Colby | 0.1571 | 31.42 | 15.72 | 28.98 | 57.17 | 6.57 | 6.78 |
9th | Trinity (CT) | 0.1656 | 30.30 | 13.74 | 26.23 | 58.22 | 5.16 | 8.28 |
10th | Wesleyan (CT) | 0.1707 | 33.38 | 16.31 | 31.44 | 54.44 | 5.12 | 9.44 |
11th | Bates | 0.2047 | 35.09 | 14.62 | 31.93 | 53.01 | 2.91 | 11.54 |
Description | Average | Remove First and Last | Remove Top and Bottom 2 | Remove Top and Bottom 3 | Composite |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Scores | 1,293.4878 | 1,293.5511 | 1,290.7717 | 1,283.6554 | 1,290.3665 |
Difference | 0.0633 | -2.7161 | -9.8324 | -4.1617 |
Offense | Defense | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Team | Sets | S | SP | SA | SE | SP% | S/SA | S/SE | OS | SPA | SAA | SEA | SO% | OS/SAA | OS/SEA |
Tufts | 113 | 1,732 | 912 | 199 | 183 | 52.66 | 8.7 | 9.5 | 1,493 | 663 | 176 | 191 | 55.59 | 8.5 | 7.8 |
Amherst | 96 | 1,715 | 904 | 173 | 92 | 52.71 | 9.9 | 18.6 | 1,488 | 666 | 158 | 194 | 55.24 | 9.4 | 7.7 |
Williams | 119 | 1,644 | 777 | 260 | 282 | 47.26 | 6.3 | 5.8 | 1,485 | 606 | 125 | 232 | 59.19 | 11.9 | 6.4 |
Bowdoin | 120 | 1,703 | 838 | 264 | 305 | 49.21 | 6.5 | 5.6 | 1,557 | 689 | 178 | 228 | 55.75 | 8.7 | 6.8 |
Middlebury | 87 | 1,604 | 755 | 154 | 155 | 47.07 | 10.4 | 10.3 | 1,510 | 658 | 114 | 151 | 56.42 | 13.2 | 10.0 |
Wesleyan (CT) | 84 | 725 | 358 | 174 | 198 | 49.38 | 4.2 | 3.7 | 694 | 319 | 153 | 158 | 54.04 | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Bates | 81 | 1,142 | 590 | 224 | 178 | 51.66 | 5.1 | 6.4 | 1,082 | 540 | 191 | 212 | 50.09 | 5.7 | 5.1 |
Hamilton | 101 | 712 | 336 | 217 | 211 | 47.19 | 3.3 | 3.4 | 717 | 341 | 188 | 197 | 52.44 | 3.8 | 3.6 |
Colby | 85 | 463 | 216 | 212 | 233 | 46.65 | 2.2 | 2.0 | 496 | 255 | 132 | 194 | 48.59 | 3.8 | 2.6 |
Connecticut Col. | 93 | 557 | 246 | 160 | 193 | 44.17 | 3.5 | 2.9 | 625 | 312 | 136 | 178 | 50.08 | 4.6 | 3.5 |
Trinity (CT) | 87 | 79 | 22 | 200 | 218 | 27.85 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 148 | 93 | 187 | 150 | 37.16 | 0.8 | 1.0 |
Conference Average | 97 | 1,098 | 541 | 203 | 204 | 46.89 | 5.5 | 6.2 | 1,027 | 467 | 158 | 190 | 52.24 | 6.8 | 5.4 |
|
|
|
Game Link | EPIC | Game Date | Location | Teams | Sets | Set 1 | Set 2 | Set 3 | Set 4 | Set 5 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GAME |
67.53 |
2014-09-26 | Amherst, Mass. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAME |
66.73 |
2014-11-07 | Medford, MA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAME |
64.94 |
2014-10-31 | Amherst, Mass. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAME |
64.51 |
2014-11-01 | Williamstown, MA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAME |
62.89 |
2014-11-09 | Medford, MA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAME |
62.35 |
2014-11-07 | Medford, Mass. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAME |
62.27 |
2014-10-03 | Amherst, Mass. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAME |
61.44 |
2014-10-10 | Middlebury, Vt. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAME |
61.29 |
2014-11-08 | Medford, MA |
|
|
|
|
|
||
GAME |
61.17 |
2014-11-08 | Medford, MA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name | Team | Role |
---|---|---|
Maggie Danner | Amherst | A |
Christy Jewett | Bowdoin | A |
Isabel Kuhel | Tufts | A |
Erika Sklaver | Bowdoin | A |
Tori Jasuta | Williams | D |
Katie Warshaw | Amherst | D |
Hannah Blackburn | Middlebury | S |
Name | Team | Role |
---|---|---|
Melanie English | Middlebury | A |
Hayley Hopper | Tufts | A |
Maddie Kuppe | Tufts | A |
Raea Rasmussen | Williams | A |
Katie Doherty | Bowdoin | D |
Olivia Kolodka | Middlebury | D |
Claire Larson | Wesleyan (CT) | S |
Rank | Name | Team |
---|---|---|
1 | Tori Jasuta | Williams |
2 | Christy Jewett | Bowdoin |
3 | Hannah Blackburn | Middlebury |
4 | Katie Warshaw | Amherst |
5 | Maggie Danner | Amherst |
Rank | Name | Team |
---|---|---|
1 | Christy Jewett | Bowdoin |
2 | Maggie Danner | Amherst |
3 | Hayley Hopper | Tufts |
4 | Maddie Kuppe | Tufts |
5 | Becca Raffel | Middlebury |
Rank | Name | Team |
---|---|---|
1 | Hannah Blackburn | Middlebury |
2 | Claire Larson | Wesleyan (CT) |
3 | Kyndal Burdin | Hamilton |
4 | Emily Arterbury | Connecticut Col. |
5 | Emily Moslener | Colby |
Rank | Name | Team |
---|---|---|
1 | Katie Warshaw | Amherst |
2 | Katie Doherty | Bowdoin |
3 | Olivia Kolodka | Middlebury |
4 | Lizzy Reed | Middlebury |
5 | Asha Walker | Amherst |
Rk. | Name | Team | WPA |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Tori Jasuta | Williams | 17.4345 |
2 | Christy Jewett | Bowdoin | 16.2764 |
3 | Katie Warshaw | Amherst | 12.2359 |
4 | Hannah Blackburn | Middlebury | 12.1626 |
5 | Katie Doherty | Bowdoin | 11.9355 |
6 | Hayley Hopper | Tufts | 10.3877 |
7 | Maggie Danner | Amherst | 10.2128 |
8 | Ryan Farley | Williams | 9.2595 |
9 | Claire Miller | Williams | 8.8175 |
10 | Nicole Carter | Amherst | 8.7393 |
Rk. | Name | Team | OWPA |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Christy Jewett | Bowdoin | 9.4689 |
2 | Tori Jasuta | Williams | 8.8840 |
3 | Hannah Blackburn | Middlebury | 7.7771 |
4 | Maggie Danner | Amherst | 7.7063 |
5 | Hayley Hopper | Tufts | 6.0446 |
6 | Erika Sklaver | Bowdoin | 5.9313 |
7 | Raea Rasmussen | Williams | 5.7837 |
8 | Ryan Farley | Williams | 5.7098 |
9 | Isabel Kuhel | Tufts | 5.0850 |
10 | Maddie Kuppe | Tufts | 4.9615 |
Rk. | Name | Team | DWPA |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Katie Warshaw | Amherst | 11.4735 |
2 | Katie Doherty | Bowdoin | 10.6739 |
3 | Lizzy Reed | Middlebury | 9.0611 |
4 | Tori Jasuta | Williams | 8.5506 |
5 | Christy Jewett | Bowdoin | 6.8075 |
6 | Carolina Berger | Tufts | 6.4569 |
7 | Amanda Schott | Williams | 6.0119 |
8 | Caitie Benell | Williams | 5.5170 |
9 | Olivia Kolodka | Middlebury | 5.4521 |
10 | Emily Kolodka | Middlebury | 5.2275 |
Rk. | Name | Team | WPA/S |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Tori Jasuta | Williams | 0.2527 |
2 | Christy Jewett | Bowdoin | 0.2142 |
3 | Tyla Taylor | Wesleyan (CT) | 0.1845 |
4 | Hannah Blackburn | Middlebury | 0.1738 |
5 | Katie Warshaw | Amherst | 0.1676 |
6 | Claire Larson | Wesleyan (CT) | 0.1643 |
7 | Katie Doherty | Bowdoin | 0.1570 |
8 | Hayley Hopper | Tufts | 0.1484 |
9 | Kyndal Burdin | Hamilton | 0.1462 |
10 | Anna Brown | Hamilton | 0.1386 |
Rk. | Name | Team | OWPA/S |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Tori Jasuta | Williams | 0.1288 |
2 | Christy Jewett | Bowdoin | 0.1246 |
3 | Hannah Blackburn | Middlebury | 0.1111 |
4 | Claire Larson | Wesleyan (CT) | 0.1041 |
5 | Maggie Danner | Amherst | 0.1028 |
6 | Sarah Swenson | Wesleyan (CT) | 0.0944 |
7 | Kyndal Burdin | Hamilton | 0.0911 |
8 | Tyla Taylor | Wesleyan (CT) | 0.0897 |
9 | Hayley Hopper | Tufts | 0.0864 |
10 | Jessica Weston | Hamilton | 0.0845 |
Rk. | Name | Team | DWPA/S |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Katie Warshaw | Amherst | 0.1572 |
2 | Anna Brown | Hamilton | 0.1542 |
3 | Katie Doherty | Bowdoin | 0.1404 |
4 | Lizzy Reed | Middlebury | 0.1313 |
5 | Rachel Savage | Wesleyan (CT) | 0.1265 |
6 | Tori Jasuta | Williams | 0.1239 |
7 | Laryssa Schepel | Bates | 0.1055 |
8 | Tyla Taylor | Wesleyan (CT) | 0.0948 |
9 | Chandler McGrath | Bates | 0.0906 |
10 | Carolina Berger | Tufts | 0.0897 |
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.