Nerdly Nebraska.

2018-2019 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Stanford 1,750.6919
BPR D1 NCAAWBB Baylor 0.7877

Football clemson 12.6021
Men's Basketball duke 12.9755
Women's Basketball baylor 13.5441
Baseball ucla 9.9898
Softball oklahoma 13.2804
Ice Hockey st cloud st 10.4909
Men's Lacrosse penn st 8.2473
Women's Lacrosse maryland 11.2293
Men's Soccer palm beach atl 10.6001
Women's Soccer usc 12.7949
Men's Volleyball hawaii 9.5453
Women's Volleyball stanford 12.9947
Field Hockey north carolina 12.5324

UAA - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 3
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Emory 1,580.0613 1,583.6144 1,581.8368 60.59 70.34 0.291
2nd Chicago 1,541.7908 1,556.8187 1,549.2865 58.10 68.92 0.265
3rd Washington-St. Louis 1,528.5219 1,536.2504 1,532.3813 59.30 66.85 0.261
4th Carnegie Mellon 1,488.4304 1,508.6270 1,498.4947 57.59 65.70 0.222
5th CWRU 1,441.8121 1,461.0468 1,451.3976 53.61 63.73 0.168
6th NYU 1,383.0647 1,407.0758 1,395.0186 51.38 59.67 0.124
7th Brandeis 1,374.8755 1,405.6950 1,390.1998 50.75 60.63 0.098
8th Rochester (NY) 1,375.2548 1,399.8079 1,387.4771 50.74 60.62 0.119

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 0.3334 45.96 12.61 42.70 42.23 3.73 11.86
2nd Chicago 0.3183 41.30 9.47 38.69 47.80 3.08 9.10
3rd Washington-St. Louis 0.3130 44.22 12.91 40.63 43.43 3.21 9.43
4th Carnegie Mellon 0.3022 41.61 11.40 38.37 45.62 3.22 11.41
5th CWRU 0.2697 37.31 10.34 34.70 50.92 3.14 7.72
6th Rochester (NY) 0.2351 37.79 14.27 35.27 48.90 3.54 10.20
7th NYU 0.2278 37.39 14.60 34.76 50.23 3.49 8.29
8th Brandeis 0.1938 35.12 15.75 32.73 50.80 4.20 9.90

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Emory 0.0427 23.55 19.27 22.31 61.66 6.88 4.64
2nd Washington-St. Louis 0.0525 24.52 19.27 22.50 59.19 6.57 5.78
3rd Chicago 0.0534 22.99 17.66 21.68 63.16 4.54 5.67
4th Carnegie Mellon 0.0805 25.73 17.68 23.75 62.50 5.21 6.32
5th Brandeis 0.0954 27.48 17.94 25.34 58.60 5.49 6.46
6th CWRU 0.1021 27.63 17.42 25.62 58.17 5.29 6.36
7th NYU 0.1035 28.68 18.32 25.65 54.19 6.74 6.40
8th Rochester (NY) 0.1163 28.77 17.14 26.01 57.41 5.45 6.68

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,473.2616 1,469.4631 1,469.3230 1,474.9461 1,471.7485
Difference -3.7985 -3.9385 1.6846 -2.0175

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 122 2,916 1,477 273 254 50.65 10.7 11.5 2,439 959 148 241 60.68 16.5 10.1
Chicago 130 2,857 1,400 198 262 49.00 14.4 10.9 2,467 984 180 217 60.11 13.7 11.4
Washington-St. Louis 125 2,798 1,387 184 189 49.57 15.2 14.8 2,525 1,085 182 243 57.03 13.9 10.4
Carnegie Mellon 128 2,771 1,369 271 197 49.41 10.2 14.1 2,479 1,067 202 205 56.96 12.3 12.1
CWRU 108 2,306 1,092 135 106 47.36 17.1 21.8 2,149 932 177 173 56.63 12.1 12.4
Rochester (NY) 127 2,312 1,108 284 294 47.92 8.1 7.9 2,173 963 179 243 55.68 12.1 8.9
NYU 139 2,793 1,334 227 280 47.76 12.3 10.0 2,642 1,181 215 285 55.30 12.3 9.3
Brandeis 106 2,174 1,013 206 171 46.60 10.6 12.7 2,125 966 166 212 54.54 12.8 10.0
Conference Average 123 2,616 1,273 222 219 48.53 12.3 12.9 2,375 1,017 181 227 57.12 13.2 10.6
  • 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

75.31

2018-10-14 Pittsburgh, Pa.
Carnegie Mellon
Chicago
1
3
24
26
26
28
25
15
19
25
GAME

73.09

2018-11-03 Rochester, NY
Chicago
Emory
0
3
23
25
20
25
31
33
GAME

72.97

2018-11-02 Rochester, NY
Chicago
Washington-St. Louis
3
1
25
23
20
25
25
12
25
22
GAME

71.49

2018-10-13 Pittsburgh, Pa.
Carnegie Mellon
Washington-St. Louis
2
3
19
25
26
28
27
25
25
21
10
15
GAME

71.11

2018-11-02 Rochester, NY
Carnegie Mellon
Emory
0
3
25
27
16
25
16
25
GAME

70.18

2018-09-29 Waltham, MA
Carnegie Mellon
NYU
3
1
30
28
25
11
27
29
25
13
GAME

70.03

2018-10-13 Pittsburgh, Pa.
Chicago
Emory
0
3
19
25
21
25
23
25
GAME

69.38

2018-09-30 Waltham, MA
Emory
Carnegie Mellon
1
3
20
25
20
25
25
22
21
25
GAME

68.71

2018-09-30 Waltham, Mass.
Chicago
Washington-St. Louis
3
0
26
24
25
20
25
21
GAME

68.24

2018-09-29
CWRU
Washington-St. Louis
0
3
19
25
19
25
28
30

HuskerGeek UAA All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
S
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 28.8209
2 26.3123
3 24.5558
4 22.2300
5 22.1987
6 21.6255
7 21.5892
8 19.4262
9 18.4862
10 17.7494

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 18.4223
2 17.1959
3 17.0530
4 14.6031
5 14.1900
6 14.0549
7 12.5491
8 12.0063
9 11.7937
10 10.9106

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 19.9708
2 16.4403
3 15.6940
4 14.6884
5 13.9072
6 12.9004
7 12.1223
8 11.6890
9 11.6251
10 10.7104

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2343
2 0.2308
3 0.2064
4 0.1850
5 0.1837
6 0.1830
7 0.1817
8 0.1636
9 0.1585
10 0.1579

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1548
2 0.1421
3 0.1398
4 0.1285
5 0.1245
6 0.1207
7 0.1181
8 0.1130
9 0.1053
10 0.1035

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1678
2 0.1481
3 0.1350
4 0.1286
5 0.1229
6 0.1194
7 0.1098
8 0.1063
9 0.1010
10 0.0991


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