Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

Atlantic 10 - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 1
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Dayton 1,691.2102 1,655.0503 1,673.0325 52.24 59.73 0.142
2nd VCU 1,664.1868 1,626.4250 1,645.1976 51.50 58.94 0.116
3rd Saint Louis 1,585.2320 1,549.2477 1,567.1365 43.85 59.21 0.027
4th La Salle 1,583.0406 1,550.3711 1,566.6207 45.78 58.14 0.027
5th George Washington 1,531.7529 1,496.4015 1,513.9740 48.15 50.78 -0.048
6th Fordham 1,515.0334 1,482.0025 1,498.4270 44.89 52.59 -0.041
7th Davidson 1,498.4891 1,469.7640 1,484.0571 42.05 54.91 -0.067
8th Rhode Island 1,499.1137 1,465.4479 1,482.1852 41.65 51.86 -0.063
9th Duquesne 1,492.5188 1,464.1516 1,478.2672 42.95 51.73 -0.049
10th George Mason 1,452.1575 1,422.6199 1,437.3129 43.74 45.96 -0.085

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 VCU 0.2906 41.26 12.20 38.76 43.76 4.88 6.36
2nd Dayton 0.2768 41.40 13.72 37.54 45.50 4.72 7.10
3rd La Salle 0.2261 36.89 14.27 34.74 46.64 6.37 6.83
4th Saint Louis 0.2208 37.64 15.57 35.12 49.04 5.61 7.39
5th Duquesne 0.1872 33.90 15.19 31.67 51.95 6.37 5.44
6th Davidson 0.1855 33.85 15.30 31.68 50.33 5.75 5.31
7th Rhode Island 0.1796 31.87 13.91 29.78 52.11 6.90 6.65
8th George Mason 0.1698 32.49 15.51 29.99 52.19 6.49 5.32
9th Fordham 0.1681 30.03 13.22 27.55 57.87 4.75 4.37
10th George Washington 0.1667 33.89 17.22 30.98 51.77 5.81 6.83

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Dayton 0.1344 30.99 17.55 28.46 52.00 7.20 5.60
2nd VCU 0.1750 34.33 16.83 31.62 46.68 9.70 6.49
3rd Saint Louis 0.1936 35.15 15.79 32.31 50.91 5.33 8.37
4th La Salle 0.1992 33.17 13.25 30.48 53.01 4.50 5.41
5th Fordham 0.2093 34.45 13.52 32.22 50.31 4.99 5.81
6th George Washington 0.2150 36.83 15.33 34.27 48.02 7.22 6.97
7th Duquesne 0.2362 37.13 13.50 33.95 48.39 4.64 9.27
8th Rhode Island 0.2425 36.34 12.09 33.44 49.02 3.94 6.79
9th Davidson 0.2529 40.11 14.82 37.31 44.96 5.18 7.46
10th George Mason 0.2545 38.73 13.28 35.51 46.58 5.79 8.22

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,534.6211 1,529.4832 1,518.7334 1,515.7697 1,524.6518
Difference -5.1379 -15.8876 -18.8514 -13.2923

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Dayton 109 2,531 1,351 168 243 53.38 15.1 10.4 2,118 903 122 192 57.37 17.4 11.0
VCU 109 2,314 1,175 139 227 50.78 16.6 10.2 2,043 870 126 228 57.42 16.2 9.0
Saint Louis 107 2,403 1,078 177 265 44.86 13.6 9.1 2,300 970 181 236 57.83 12.7 9.7
La Salle 107 2,393 1,089 167 286 45.51 14.3 8.4 2,314 1,010 118 218 56.35 19.6 10.6
Fordham 106 2,309 1,085 117 145 46.99 19.7 15.9 2,299 1,066 124 235 53.63 18.5 9.8
Davidson 105 2,219 992 123 180 44.71 18.0 12.3 2,244 1,008 157 218 55.08 14.3 10.3
George Washington 100 2,074 1,024 159 165 49.37 13.0 12.6 2,116 1,054 145 224 50.19 14.6 9.4
Rhode Island 95 2,002 885 130 217 44.21 15.4 9.2 2,135 1,031 138 188 51.71 15.5 11.4
Duquesne 94 1,978 877 108 144 44.34 18.3 13.7 2,136 1,045 186 181 51.08 11.5 11.8
George Mason 97 1,953 893 116 116 45.73 16.8 16.8 2,199 1,187 178 177 46.02 12.4 12.4
Conference Average 103 2,218 1,045 140 199 46.99 16.1 11.9 2,190 1,014 148 210 53.67 15.3 10.5
  • 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 Atlantic 10

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

77.28

2019-11-24 Kingston, RI
VCU
Dayton
1
3
25
22
23
25
20
25
19
25
GAME

76.90

2019-09-28 Kingston, R.I.
Rhode Island
Fordham
3
2
27
25
25
27
20
25
25
22
20
18
GAME

74.29

2019-11-01 Kingston, RI
Rhode Island
La Salle
0
3
24
26
25
27
22
25
GAME

73.87

2019-11-17
Dayton
VCU
2
3
25
21
21
25
25
17
20
25
11
15
GAME

73.54

2019-10-04 St. Louis, Mo.
Saint Louis
Fordham
3
2
25
20
25
22
28
30
24
26
15
11
GAME

73.32

2019-10-18 Kingston, RI
Rhode Island
Saint Louis
2
3
23
25
23
25
26
24
25
22
12
15
GAME

72.83

2019-11-08 Philadelphia, Pa.
La Salle
Dayton
1
3
21
25
27
25
12
25
16
25
GAME

72.68

2019-10-27 Philadelphia, Pa.
La Salle
VCU
0
3
29
31
24
26
20
25
GAME

72.45

2019-10-25 St. Louis, Mo.
Saint Louis
George Mason
3
2
23
25
25
22
26
24
19
25
16
14
GAME

72.35

2019-10-18
George Washington
La Salle
3
2
25
23
26
24
15
25
27
29
15
10

HuskerGeek Atlantic 10 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 23.5118
2 22.4801
3 22.4702
4 22.4167
5 21.7798
6 21.7560
7 21.6862
8 18.7970
9 17.1680
10 17.1622

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 13.7690
2 13.2225
3 12.9450
4 12.8964
5 12.3728
6 12.0036
7 10.9686
8 10.9650
9 10.0411
10 9.1627

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 21.1777
2 16.3247
3 15.4337
4 14.4272
5 12.8847
6 12.7511
7 12.5677
8 12.5468
9 12.4924
10 11.9335

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2266
2 0.2239
3 0.2161
4 0.2101
5 0.2095
6 0.2074
7 0.2046
8 0.1861
9 0.1846
10 0.1767

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1348
2 0.1324
3 0.1263
4 0.1247
5 0.1205
6 0.1188
7 0.1108
8 0.1044
9 0.0994
10 0.0879

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.2017
2 0.1718
3 0.1442
4 0.1348
5 0.1301
6 0.1239
7 0.1230
8 0.1214
9 0.1208
10 0.1195


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