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 12.9757
Women's Basketball baylor 13.5441
Baseball vanderbilt 10.1606
Softball oklahoma 13.3516
Ice Hockey st cloud st 10.4909
Men's Lacrosse penn st 7.8422
Women's Lacrosse maryland 11.2186
Men's Soccer palm beach atl 10.6001
Women's Soccer usc 12.7949
Men's Volleyball hawaii 9.4513
Women's Volleyball stanford 12.9947
Field Hockey north carolina 12.5324

ViPR NCAA Volleyball Ratings

Division 1

Rnk. Team Conference
1st Stanford Pac-12
2nd Nebraska Big Ten
3rd Minnesota Big Ten
5th Illinois Big Ten
6th Wisconsin Big Ten
7th Penn St. Big Ten
8th Kentucky SEC
9th Texas Big 12
10th Pittsburgh ACC

Division 1 Standouts

Award Name Team
-- Expand Division 1 --

Division 2

Rnk. Team Conference
1st Cal St. San B'dino CCAA
2nd Western Wash. Great Northwest
3rd Minn. Duluth NSIC
4th Southwest Minn. St. NSIC
5th Concordia-St. Paul NSIC
6th Northern St. NSIC
7th Washburn MIAA
8th Neb.-Kearney MIAA
9th Lewis GLVC
10th Rockhurst GLVC

Division 2 Standouts

Award Name Team
-- Expand Division 2 --

Division 3

Rnk. Team Conference
1st Wittenberg NCAC
2nd Emory UAA
3rd Thomas More ACAA
4th Calvin MIAA
5th Wis.-Eau Claire WIAC
6th Gust. Adolphus MIAC
7th Texas-Dallas ASC
8th Juniata Landmark
9th Colorado Col. SCAC
10th Trinity (TX) SCAC

Division 3 Standouts

Award Name Team
-- Expand Division 3 --

BPR NCAA Women's Basketball Ratings

Division 1

Rnk. Team Conference
1st Baylor Big 12
2nd Mississippi St. SEC
3rd Oregon Pac-12
4th UConn AAC
5th Notre Dame ACC
6th Louisville ACC
7th Marquette Big East
8th Stanford Pac-12
9th Iowa St. Big 12
10th Oregon St. Pac-12
-- Expand Division 1 --

Division 2

Rnk. Team Conference
1st Drury GLVC
2nd Ashland GLIAC
3rd Lubbock Christian Heartland
4th Fort Hays St. MIAA
5th Grand Valley St. GLIAC
6th Lewis GLVC
7th Minn. Duluth NSIC
8th Fla. Southern Sunshine State
9th Alas. Anchorage Great Northwest
10th Northwest Nazarene Great Northwest
-- Expand Division 2 --

Division 3

Rnk. Team Conference
1st Thomas More ACAA
2nd Bowdoin NESCAC
3rd St. Thomas (MN) MIAC
4th Tufts NESCAC
5th Amherst NESCAC
6th Wis.-Oshkosh WIAC
7th Trine MIAA
8th DePauw NCAC
9th Wartburg American Rivers
10th DeSales MAC Freedom
-- Expand Division 3 --

Advanced Rate Statistics for NCAA Women’s Volleyball

Or Why Per Set Statistics are Bullsh*t

Pop quiz.

Question 1: How many points is a set in NCAA Division 1 Volleyball?

If you said twenty-five, you are wrong. If you said twenty-five except in a fifth set when it is only fifteen, you are wrong.  If you said it depends, then congratulations you have won the game.

Question 2: Name each team that corresponds to the primary or secondary color referenced in the following table.

Hint: These figures are the average points per set for each Big Ten team last season.

Team Points Per Set
Red 41.12
Blue 42.49
Red 42.50
Red 42.87
Red 42.94
Orange 43.06
Purple 43.19
Yellow 43.23
Red 43.43
Red 43.51
Yellow 43.88
Green 43.96
Red 43.97
Blue 44.29

Answers are at the bottom.

This presents a significant issue when it comes to doing rate statistics.   A four kill per set player at 41.12 points per set would average more than 4.3 kps if they had the same kill rate and played for the last team in the table averaging 44.29 points per set.  A quick look at the current KPS table on NCAA Stats says that’s the difference between being 57th and 34th.  A significant difference.  Additionally, because the gap will widen linearly as the initial numbers grow, the result is that the players at the very top of the chart can be misrepresented to the highest degree.  That’s simply unacceptable when trying to use a statistic to formulate any significant statistical argument.

And that’s not even the worst example I could come up with.

Per Set statistics are meaningless without additional context.  The context that a person would need to supply to make those statistics worthwhile is tedious and time consuming to track and calculate.   This results in volleyball fans and the media continually relying on and relaying statistics that in reality mean very little.

It needs to change, and that’s the purpose of this article and a couple of pages that I’ve now added to the site.  While per set statistics are exceptionally flawed, points are not.  In fact, points applied in the right way can be exceptionally accurate when calculating a rate statistic.

Here are the top ten players on the current(9/15/2018) KPS leaders table.

NCAA Volleyball D1 KPS Leaders 9-15-2018

Here is the same list, but instead of per set, the rates are per point in each team’s games.

Kills Per 100 Points

Rk. Name Team KPP
1 13.8140
2 12.8452
3 11.5678
4 11.4781
5 10.9756
6 10.9277
7 10.8782
8 10.8467
9 10.7735
10 10.6240

There are differences and there can be extreme differences. In fact, with many of the common statistics volleyball fans and the media use, using points is inherently flawed.  When measuring kill rates for players, total points in a match has an inherent flaw.  Specifically, during any match there will inevitably be points wher a player who plays for all rotations will still have no chance to get a kill, namely aces and service errors.

AN: There are caveats beyond this as well. Not every player plays six rotations and there are points beyond aces and service errors during which a player would also by definition not have a chance to get a kill. Rotational errors are the specific issue in this case because I did not have the foresight to track them efficiently in my database and will need to do some significant redesign before I can efficiently account for those points.

Beyond using total points for a rate, simple subtraction can be used measure the rate at which a player gets a kill for every point in play.

This is the table for the statistic named Kills per Point-In-Play.  Original name, I know.

Kills Per 100 Points In Play

Rk. Name Team KPIP
1 16.6556
2 14.8148
3 13.5862
4 13.3621
5 13.2583
6 13.1679
7 12.9555
8 12.6316
9 12.6050
10 12.5421

It’s not even the same list as the original per point list.  While this approach is not currently perfect, it’s still much better than using per set because the denominator of the statistic being calculated means the same thing across all players.  The context per point statistics provide is important because without it volleyball statistics are very nearly meaningless.  An instance of “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.” if you will.  Making even incremental progress toward better understanding and knowledge is important.

Measuring virtually every statistic by points played improves it drastically, but Aces and Service Errors per set make the least sense as a statistic.  It is entirely possible to play a set in which a primary server will not serve during the set.  In fact, in fifth sets, it actually isn”t all that rare.  Luckily, NCAA Play-By-Play pages happen to track exactly who serves each point, a fortunate thing in this instance because those pages can be used to get per serve rates for aces, service errors, and service points.

AN: This(A primary server not getting the opportunity to serve.) actually happened to Lauren Stivrins in Set 3 of the Nebraska vs Missouri State less than three hours after I saved my latest draft of this article. Yeah, that happened.

These statistics and more have been made available on each team page as well as Division and Conference leaders.  The leaders are available using the “View Complete Advanced Statistics Leaders” link on each division or conference page.

And that friends, is why per set statistics are bullsh*t.

Answer Key

Top to Bottom: Rutgers, Penn State, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Indiana, Illinois, Northwestern, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, Purdue, Michigan State, Ohio State, Michigan

The Best This Year

These are the current all sport rankings for the school year of 2019-2020.
1st baylor Women's Basketball 37-2-0 13.3969 13.2636 13.8739 13.3956 13.5441 12.3419 12.6658
2nd oklahoma Softball 59-6-0 12.5081 13.5470 13.8238 12.5080 13.3516 13.4113 10.7510
3rd notre dame Women's Basketball 35-5-0 13.2247 12.9037 13.5996 13.1772 13.2929 14.7501 9.6288
4th ucla Softball 57-6-0 12.2769 13.1595 13.5967 12.2768 13.0620 12.9417 10.7239
5th uconn Women's Basketball 35-3-0 12.9691 12.8117 13.0488 12.9605 13.0102 12.8144 11.2911
6th mississippi st Women's Basketball 33-3-0 13.0791 12.8432 12.7695 13.0520 13.0028 13.8875 10.3067
7th stanford Women's Volleyball 36-1-0 13.0213 13.0163 13.0662 13.0216 12.9947 9.7839 14.9824
8th duke Men's Basketball 33-6-0 12.5122 12.7498 13.7077 12.4956 12.9757 13.0015 9.0065
9th oregon Women's Basketball 32-5-0 12.7617 12.5556 13.3015 12.7329 12.8981 13.6938 9.8961
10th usc Women's Soccer 5-1-2 9.8719 13.0236 14.3521 7.9418 12.7949 5.8632 -2.2929
11th gonzaga Men's Basketball 33-4-0 12.6059 12.7733 12.6402 12.5899 12.7469 13.0199 9.1415
12th florida state Women's Soccer 10-1-1 9.3749 12.8353 14.5804 7.4676 12.6526 5.3231 -1.9670
13th virginia Men's Basketball 35-4-0 11.9819 12.5348 13.7810 11.9116 12.6416 7.0260 13.2584
14th clemson Football 15-0-0 12.3003 12.5098 13.2643 12.3059 12.6021 11.7940 12.0676
15th north carolina Field Hockey 23-0-0 12.4539 12.5061 12.5151 12.4539 12.5324 13.8630 9.6644
16th alabama Football 14-1-0 12.2475 12.3392 12.6072 12.2521 12.3861 12.3186 11.4241
17th mich st Men's Basketball 32-8-0 11.8379 12.1793 13.2069 11.8331 12.3666 10.5610 10.0072
18th louisville Women's Basketball 32-4-0 11.9352 11.9270 13.0124 11.9333 12.2491 11.4198 10.8087
19th stanford Women's Soccer 22-1-2 9.2786 12.3673 13.7495 7.0958 12.1635 3.6422 -0.4583
20th arizona Softball 56-16-0 11.5191 12.1330 12.2979 11.5190 12.0343 11.7554 10.3621
21st texas tech Men's Basketball 31-7-0 11.4738 11.9408 12.9204 11.4362 12.0318 7.6325 11.9236
22nd ucla Women's Soccer 17-3-2 9.3841 12.1839 13.3194 7.0776 11.9786 4.0172 -0.8402
23rd washington Softball 53-9-0 10.7174 12.0228 12.9393 10.7171 11.9385 9.4275 10.8099
24th north carolina Men's Basketball 29-8-0 11.5177 11.6481 12.4609 11.4801 11.8787 13.3802 7.0844
25th tennessee Men's Basketball 31-6-0 11.2347 11.5390 12.8768 11.2274 11.8240 11.3370 8.3748