Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

ASUN - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 1
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Kennesaw St. 1,675.5885 1,667.8219 1,671.7007 46.47 63.74 0.093
2nd FGCU 1,649.5735 1,648.2150 1,648.8942 43.90 63.52 0.061
3rd Lipscomb 1,639.4655 1,624.6662 1,632.0491 43.71 62.69 0.053
4th Jacksonville 1,558.1208 1,571.6742 1,564.8829 40.81 56.78 -0.023
5th North Florida 1,526.9707 1,534.6530 1,530.8070 39.81 54.80 -0.050
6th USC Upstate 1,480.1964 1,490.5737 1,485.3760 36.51 52.90 -0.097
7th Stetson 1,461.7329 1,465.2577 1,463.4942 38.83 48.95 -0.112
8th NJIT 1,434.2293 1,446.3642 1,440.2840 34.96 50.30 -0.146

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 FGCU 0.2511 38.46 13.36 36.05 48.29 5.49 4.95
2nd Lipscomb 0.2427 41.34 17.07 39.24 41.92 7.67 5.91
3rd Kennesaw St. 0.2349 38.47 14.99 35.51 45.75 4.77 4.81
4th Jacksonville 0.1849 33.88 15.39 31.63 51.60 5.96 4.40
5th North Florida 0.1743 33.60 16.17 31.84 51.92 6.87 5.29
6th USC Upstate 0.1534 29.61 14.27 27.17 56.01 5.73 4.14
7th Stetson 0.1397 28.89 14.93 26.80 57.41 5.92 5.71
8th NJIT 0.1271 30.76 18.05 28.48 52.96 7.30 5.98

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Kennesaw St. 0.1423 31.80 17.57 29.78 53.96 6.11 3.93
2nd Lipscomb 0.1898 34.65 15.67 32.88 52.31 6.32 3.85
3rd FGCU 0.1904 35.04 16.00 32.59 50.86 6.08 5.36
4th Jacksonville 0.2075 35.61 14.86 33.15 51.09 4.95 6.69
5th North Florida 0.2247 36.96 14.49 34.42 49.21 6.13 5.61
6th USC Upstate 0.2502 38.79 13.77 36.43 47.69 3.87 6.81
7th Stetson 0.2513 39.46 14.33 36.25 46.42 5.30 6.99
8th NJIT 0.2727 40.74 13.48 38.46 44.68 4.57 6.19

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,554.6860 1,554.2506 1,553.2787 1,547.8449 1,552.5151
Difference -0.4354 -1.4073 -6.8411 -2.8946

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
FGCU 108 2,531 1,146 130 211 45.28 19.5 12.0 2,203 796 112 221 63.87 19.7 10.0
Kennesaw St. 89 2,080 959 96 164 46.11 21.7 12.7 1,823 680 74 184 62.70 24.6 9.9
Lipscomb 104 2,337 986 131 253 42.19 17.8 9.2 2,262 898 82 168 60.30 27.6 13.5
Jacksonville 109 2,412 1,036 111 174 42.95 21.7 13.9 2,371 995 145 183 58.04 16.4 13.0
North Florida 115 2,473 1,039 139 246 42.01 17.8 10.1 2,542 1,115 132 219 56.14 19.3 11.6
NJIT 114 2,391 1,011 176 278 42.28 13.6 8.6 2,507 1,140 149 237 54.53 16.8 10.6
USC Upstate 109 2,226 864 99 155 38.81 22.5 14.4 2,506 1,156 160 198 53.87 15.7 12.7
Stetson 98 1,934 785 112 101 40.59 17.3 19.1 2,258 1,132 153 173 49.87 14.8 13.1
Conference Average 106 2,298 978 124 198 42.53 19.0 12.5 2,309 989 126 198 57.41 19.3 11.8
  • 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 ASUN

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

77.53

2017-10-28 Jacksonville, Fla.
Jacksonville
FGCU
3
1
29
27
26
24
18
25
25
23
GAME

77.41

2017-11-11 Fort Myers, FL
FGCU
Kennesaw St.
1
3
25
12
28
30
27
29
18
25
GAME

76.73

2017-11-03 Nashville, Tenn.
Lipscomb
Jacksonville
1
3
19
25
29
31
25
21
23
25
GAME

75.87

2017-09-22 Kennesaw, Ga.
Kennesaw St.
Lipscomb
3
2
31
29
19
25
22
25
27
25
15
7
GAME

75.41

2017-11-17 Nashville, Tennessee
FGCU
Jacksonville
3
0
25
20
26
24
25
21
GAME

75.07

2017-11-18 Nashville, Tennessee
FGCU
Kennesaw St.
0
3
23
25
22
25
17
25
GAME

74.49

2017-11-11 Jacksonville, Fla.
Jacksonville
USC Upstate
3
2
21
25
25
19
24
26
25
22
15
10
GAME

73.79

2017-11-03 Spartanburg, S.C.
USC Upstate
Stetson
3
0
26
24
25
17
34
32
GAME

73.76

2017-11-17 Nashville, Tennessee
Lipscomb
Kennesaw St.
1
3
18
25
25
20
19
25
23
25
GAME

73.31

2017-11-10 Fort Myers, FL
FGCU
Lipscomb
3
0
25
19
25
22
25
22

HuskerGeek ASUN 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 29.5273
2 26.1944
3 23.5060
4 22.1049
5 18.5554
6 18.2082
7 17.9922
8 17.4460
9 16.2193
10 15.7038

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 17.1649
2 16.6830
3 15.4896
4 14.3872
5 12.3141
6 12.3026
7 9.1538
8 8.7576
9 8.6559
10 8.5960

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 17.0414
2 16.1364
3 14.0297
4 13.7472
5 13.6097
6 12.7381
7 12.3625
8 10.9021
9 10.7048
10 10.4428

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2867
2 0.2519
3 0.2351
4 0.2142
5 0.2047
6 0.1734
7 0.1702
8 0.1651
9 0.1600
10 0.1590

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1666
2 0.1545
3 0.1489
4 0.1449
5 0.1439
6 0.1129
7 0.0944
8 0.0915
9 0.0838
10 0.0830

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1482
2 0.1480
3 0.1324
4 0.1273
5 0.1271
6 0.1226
7 0.1225
8 0.1225
9 0.1200
10 0.1029


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