Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

UAA - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 3
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Emory 1,535.7408 1,524.6726 1,530.1967 60.29 72.17 0.323
2nd Washington-St. Louis 1,513.5045 1,505.6850 1,509.5896 59.36 71.14 0.298
3rd Chicago 1,495.6737 1,484.1270 1,489.8892 58.23 69.27 0.231
4th Carnegie Mellon 1,406.6097 1,403.6867 1,405.1474 55.16 63.49 0.179
5th CWRU 1,362.9781 1,367.6586 1,365.3164 53.55 62.57 0.136
6th NYU 1,334.4226 1,332.0285 1,333.2250 52.22 59.03 0.113
7th Rochester (NY) 1,254.5592 1,273.3780 1,263.9336 47.56 56.91 -0.022
8th Brandeis 1,173.1936 1,168.9750 1,171.0824 46.38 46.34 -0.077

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 Emory 0.3603 46.55 10.51 42.85 42.48 3.54 9.88
2nd Washington-St. Louis 0.3257 45.32 12.75 41.72 41.40 3.04 9.16
3rd Chicago 0.2961 40.80 11.19 38.06 47.57 2.72 11.19
4th Carnegie Mellon 0.2561 38.29 12.68 34.12 54.54 3.71 10.15
5th CWRU 0.2503 36.58 11.56 34.47 52.89 3.55 8.85
6th NYU 0.2045 35.95 15.50 33.25 48.06 3.98 8.77
7th Rochester (NY) 0.1266 31.35 18.69 29.13 53.13 4.42 10.82
8th Brandeis 0.0907 29.51 20.44 27.54 56.35 4.28 10.01

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Washington-St. Louis 0.0281 21.21 18.40 19.68 65.05 5.89 4.56
2nd Emory 0.0374 23.03 19.29 21.63 61.58 6.91 4.42
3rd Chicago 0.0651 23.26 16.75 21.77 63.81 5.43 5.29
4th Carnegie Mellon 0.0771 26.70 18.99 24.14 59.77 6.27 6.01
5th NYU 0.0919 26.25 17.06 24.18 59.62 4.92 6.85
6th CWRU 0.1147 28.57 17.10 25.80 57.22 4.56 4.95
7th Rochester (NY) 0.1484 29.87 15.03 28.01 62.55 3.22 6.50
8th Brandeis 0.1673 32.36 15.63 29.20 53.95 3.73 10.16

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,383.5475 1,394.5169 1,398.3945 1,385.2319 1,390.4227
Difference 10.9693 14.8470 1.6844 9.1669

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Emory 154 3,400 1,722 251 275 50.65 13.5 12.4 2,736 1,020 174 274 62.72 15.7 10.0
Washington-St. Louis 147 3,258 1,586 206 266 48.68 15.8 12.2 2,793 1,092 177 287 60.90 15.8 9.7
Chicago 143 2,941 1,490 273 228 50.66 10.8 12.9 2,525 1,046 203 251 58.57 12.4 10.1
Carnegie Mellon 126 1,907 920 241 217 48.24 7.9 8.8 1,792 795 172 223 55.64 10.4 8.0
NYU 133 2,601 1,291 255 217 49.64 10.2 12.0 2,429 1,113 221 235 54.18 11.0 10.3
Rochester (NY) 121 1,859 885 255 202 47.61 7.3 9.2 1,909 920 180 216 51.81 10.6 8.8
CWRU 109 1,481 709 150 141 47.87 9.9 10.5 1,656 903 152 202 45.47 10.9 8.2
Brandeis 106 1,340 577 162 171 43.06 8.3 7.8 1,784 1,046 253 216 41.37 7.1 8.3
Conference Average 130 2,348 1,148 224 215 48.30 10.5 10.7 2,203 992 192 238 53.83 11.7 9.2
  • 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 UAA

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

72.95

2014-10-19 Chicago, Ill.
Chicago
Emory
1
3
19
25
28
26
22
25
20
25
GAME

72.30

2014-11-08 Pittsburgh, Pa.
Chicago
Emory
1
3
26
24
15
25
18
25
20
25
GAME

71.99

2014-11-16 St. Louis, Mo.
Washington-St. Louis
Emory
2
3
23
25
25
19
18
25
27
25
12
15
GAME

68.49

2014-10-18 Chicago, Ill.
Emory
Washington-St. Louis
2
3
19
25
25
21
14
25
25
22
13
15
GAME

67.78

2014-11-07 Pittsburgh, Pa.
Chicago
Washington-St. Louis
3
0
25
22
25
13
25
21
GAME

67.53

2014-10-19 Chicago, Ill.
Carnegie Mellon
Washington-St. Louis
1
3
21
25
25
17
19
25
25
27
GAME

67.41

2014-10-04 Atlanta, GA
Chicago
NYU
3
1
26
24
25
16
21
25
25
21
GAME

67.04

2014-10-18 Chicago, Ill.
Chicago
CWRU
1
3
21
25
25
20
19
25
14
25
GAME

66.53

2014-10-05 Atlanta, GA
Emory
Carnegie Mellon
3
2
25
27
19
25
25
18
25
16
15
4
GAME

65.05

2014-10-05 Atlanta, GA
Chicago
Washington-St. Louis
3
1
20
25
25
21
25
14
25
12

HuskerGeek UAA 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

Defensive Player of the Year

Rank Name Team
1
2
3
4
5

WPA

Rk. Name Team WPA
1 28.3661
2 27.5625
3 25.8778
4 24.6036
5 21.1078
6 20.5514
7 20.3498
8 19.2869
9 19.0048
10 17.0930

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 21.7071
2 18.0334
3 14.3017
4 14.2159
5 13.2322
6 12.8077
7 11.5651
8 10.0144
9 10.0010
10 9.8860

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 19.5010
2 18.0174
3 14.9175
4 13.0701
5 11.3714
6 11.1718
7 10.9869
8 10.3328
9 10.0990
10 9.5693

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2306
2 0.2121
3 0.2068
4 0.2027
5 0.1753
6 0.1605
7 0.1541
8 0.1539
9 0.1480
10 0.1479

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1596
2 0.1466
3 0.1300
4 0.1200
5 0.1112
6 0.1087
7 0.1050
8 0.1038
9 0.0897
10 0.0884

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1373
2 0.1344
3 0.1284
4 0.1278
5 0.1262
6 0.1129
7 0.1113
8 0.1071
9 0.0972
10 0.0956


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