Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

WAC - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 1
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st New Mexico St. 1,625.0232 1,594.6481 1,609.7640 51.18 53.48 0.107
2nd Grand Canyon 1,601.6881 1,571.4812 1,586.5127 48.36 57.99 0.045
3rd California Baptist 1,576.7820 1,544.3620 1,560.4878 48.78 55.59 -0.023
4th Utah Valley 1,572.1600 1,542.7525 1,557.3868 49.55 53.47 0.037
5th UTRGV 1,555.2196 1,522.8900 1,538.9699 49.73 50.84 0.001
6th CSU Bakersfield 1,526.4225 1,492.9672 1,509.6022 44.87 53.29 -0.045
7th Seattle U 1,520.2596 1,487.4202 1,503.7503 45.85 50.16 -0.054
8th Chicago St. 1,478.8362 1,453.1264 1,465.9249 45.50 47.83 -0.103
9th UMKC 1,430.1341 1,397.2001 1,413.5712 48.33 49.10 0.005

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 New Mexico St. 0.2659 40.60 14.01 37.26 43.86 4.98 6.24
2nd Grand Canyon 0.2564 36.92 11.28 34.06 47.58 4.75 5.97
3rd Utah Valley 0.2199 37.00 15.01 34.57 48.27 5.40 5.55
4th UMKC 0.2154 30.40 8.85 28.29 54.21 6.39 0.35
5th UTRGV 0.2111 35.91 14.80 33.70 49.03 6.04 8.35
6th California Baptist 0.2039 35.36 14.97 32.55 50.67 6.17 7.05
7th CSU Bakersfield 0.1770 33.84 16.15 31.54 49.52 6.68 6.54
8th Seattle U 0.1766 35.12 17.46 32.86 47.93 6.69 7.10
9th Chicago St. 0.1423 31.02 16.79 28.89 53.25 6.31 6.23

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st New Mexico St. 0.1591 32.67 16.76 29.52 50.57 8.84 6.90
2nd Utah Valley 0.1834 35.25 16.91 32.52 47.97 7.28 7.57
3rd UTRGV 0.2098 35.89 14.91 33.32 48.00 6.42 7.39
4th UMKC 0.2109 35.69 14.60 33.21 0.51 -0.17 5.52
5th Grand Canyon 0.2117 35.23 14.05 32.59 49.03 6.29 4.97
6th CSU Bakersfield 0.2221 36.67 14.45 33.84 49.85 6.03 6.85
7th California Baptist 0.2271 37.20 14.49 34.64 47.88 4.68 6.34
8th Seattle U 0.2310 37.91 14.81 34.76 46.71 6.42 6.74
9th Chicago St. 0.2458 37.18 12.60 34.54 48.58 4.29 5.98

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,527.3300 1,531.8050 1,534.0394 1,535.3196 1,532.1235
Difference 4.4750 6.7094 7.9897 6.3913

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
California Baptist 114 2,404 1,289 168 153 53.62 14.3 15.7 2,222 1,040 136 207 53.20 16.3 10.7
Grand Canyon 109 2,524 1,275 145 212 50.52 17.4 11.9 2,292 1,023 105 260 55.37 21.8 8.8
New Mexico St. 102 2,195 1,178 145 261 53.67 15.1 8.4 1,882 913 125 155 51.49 15.1 12.1
UTRGV 117 2,296 1,224 179 239 53.31 12.8 9.6 2,341 1,208 170 207 48.40 13.8 11.3
Utah Valley 110 2,213 1,104 117 189 49.89 18.9 11.7 2,176 1,117 169 188 48.67 12.9 11.6
CSU Bakersfield 114 2,302 1,069 148 199 46.44 15.6 11.6 2,423 1,198 165 210 50.56 14.7 11.5
Seattle U 120 2,429 1,177 166 209 48.46 14.6 11.6 2,579 1,347 155 195 47.77 16.6 13.2
Chicago St. 119 2,158 1,036 151 195 48.01 14.3 11.1 2,421 1,300 137 211 46.30 17.7 11.5
UMKC 107 1,932 960 0 0 49.69 0.0 0.0 2,235 1,323 138 171 40.81 16.2 13.1
Conference Average 112 2,273 1,146 135 184 50.40 13.7 10.2 2,286 1,163 144 200 49.17 16.1 11.5
  • 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 WAC

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

78.05

2019-10-05
Grand Canyon
Utah Valley
1
3
25
19
28
30
24
26
26
28
GAME

76.85

2019-10-28
New Mexico St.
California Baptist
3
2
23
25
22
25
25
22
25
21
16
14
GAME

74.93

2019-10-19
California Baptist
Grand Canyon
2
3
25
22
23
25
25
22
18
25
11
15
GAME

72.92

2019-10-17
CSU Bakersfield
Grand Canyon
2
3
18
25
25
23
25
21
17
25
13
15
GAME

72.71

2019-11-02
Utah Valley
Grand Canyon
0
3
22
25
23
25
24
26
GAME

72.57

2019-11-07
CSU Bakersfield
New Mexico St.
1
3
28
30
25
21
25
27
17
25
GAME

72.15

2019-10-10
UTRGV
Grand Canyon
1
3
26
24
15
25
23
25
27
29
GAME

71.86

2019-10-05
California Baptist
UTRGV
2
3
20
25
18
25
25
20
25
19
13
15
GAME

71.69

2019-10-31
Seattle U
Grand Canyon
0
3
22
25
26
28
24
26
GAME

71.42

2019-11-11
CSU Bakersfield
UTRGV
3
2
20
25
27
25
25
27
25
18
15
5

HuskerGeek WAC 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 23.6591
2 18.9676
3 18.7546
4 18.0750
5 17.8844
6 17.8691
7 17.5673
8 17.2256
9 16.7403
10 16.4990

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 14.8376
2 12.6237
3 10.7899
4 10.1972
5 9.9840
6 9.7297
7 9.6363
8 9.5430
9 9.0236
10 8.9610

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 18.1787
2 17.7826
3 14.9128
4 14.7186
5 14.5229
6 13.6363
7 10.7167
8 10.6526
9 9.8736
10 9.7680

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2232
2 0.1883
3 0.1869
4 0.1824
5 0.1812
6 0.1805
7 0.1787
8 0.1705
9 0.1684
10 0.1628

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1400
2 0.1186
3 0.1117
4 0.1015
5 0.0970
6 0.0927
7 0.0920
8 0.0901
9 0.0892
10 0.0891

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1710
2 0.1638
3 0.1502
4 0.1435
5 0.1357
6 0.1286
7 0.1218
8 0.1088
9 0.1085
10 0.1065


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