Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

CIAA - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 2
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Shaw 1,356.6643 1,318.8493 1,337.6232 42.48 50.26 -0.088
2nd Fayetteville St. 1,349.2469 1,306.6284 1,327.7667 44.62 46.14 -0.114
3rd Virginia St. 1,310.3025 1,277.1051 1,293.5973 41.79 48.41 -0.140
4th Winston-Salem 1,272.2805 1,237.2087 1,254.6220 38.87 47.66 -0.152
5th Virginia Union 1,171.6715 1,136.8438 1,154.1263 34.98 39.93 -0.278
6th Claflin 1,157.2388 1,122.9376 1,139.9592 33.69 39.00 -0.304
7th Johnson C. Smith 1,158.2395 1,121.5528 1,139.7486 34.94 38.99 -0.318
8th Elizabeth City St. 1,143.3385 1,109.7075 1,126.3975 39.39 35.31 -0.306
9th Livingstone 1,121.9190 1,086.8915 1,104.2664 36.49 35.00 -0.345
10th Bowie St. 1,050.3113 1,012.8141 1,031.3923 33.61 30.00 -0.396
11th Saint Augustine's 1,002.9683 965.1178 983.8610 -9.76 -10.06 -0.501
12th Lincoln (PA) 981.9129 949.3300 965.4840 25.58 30.90 -0.465

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 Shaw 0.1444 30.38 15.94 27.56 58.55 4.02 8.07
2nd Fayetteville St. 0.1119 29.25 18.06 26.12 56.65 4.78 3.35
3rd Winston-Salem 0.0949 27.33 17.84 25.27 59.81 5.35 4.90
4th Virginia St. 0.0903 30.20 21.17 27.34 56.80 4.71 6.77
5th Claflin 0.0126 17.90 16.64 17.12 71.31 5.52 3.98
6th Elizabeth City St. 0.0081 19.41 18.60 17.90 68.08 5.28 5.82
7th Virginia Union -0.0017 17.32 17.49 15.44 68.87 4.71 1.24
8th Livingstone -0.0106 21.71 22.77 18.92 58.48 7.69 3.41
9th Johnson C. Smith -0.0155 17.91 19.46 16.23 68.34 4.70 4.06
10th Bowie St. -0.0818 14.41 22.60 12.96 72.85 6.07 5.85
11th Saint Augustine's -0.1171 13.30 25.01 12.58 73.25 8.20 18.02
12th Lincoln (PA) -0.1405 12.73 26.79 11.52 75.60 4.94 3.77

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Fayetteville St. 0.2261 37.63 15.03 34.27 45.48 5.21 9.29
2nd Virginia St. 0.2303 38.41 15.38 34.71 48.59 3.84 9.58
3rd Shaw 0.2329 38.90 15.61 35.10 46.35 4.07 9.30
4th Winston-Salem 0.2472 39.96 15.24 36.70 41.76 5.83 11.77
5th Virginia Union 0.2764 41.99 14.34 38.64 33.99 2.31 10.77
6th Johnson C. Smith 0.3023 44.68 14.45 40.52 37.76 4.06 11.77
7th Elizabeth City St. 0.3144 44.86 13.42 40.14 36.35 3.88 12.20
8th Bowie St. 0.3146 43.86 12.40 39.66 40.68 2.61 13.83
9th Claflin 0.3170 44.11 12.40 39.80 42.05 3.45 11.48
10th Lincoln (PA) 0.3245 49.17 16.72 45.95 33.24 4.21 15.83
11th Livingstone 0.3346 47.54 14.07 40.94 31.63 4.16 9.76
12th Saint Augustine's 0.3840 49.83 11.42 43.19 36.71 1.73 9.37

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,154.9037 1,155.5737 1,155.5137 1,153.1867 1,154.7945
Difference 0.6700 0.6100 -1.7170 -0.1457

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Shaw 93 2,094 1,187 231 291 56.69 9.1 7.2 1,676 719 129 160 57.10 13.0 10.5
Fayetteville St. 82 1,893 1,127 124 124 59.54 15.3 15.3 1,466 672 113 147 54.16 13.0 10.0
Winston-Salem 90 1,972 1,091 176 169 55.33 11.2 11.7 1,687 762 165 161 54.83 10.2 10.5
Virginia St. 101 2,280 1,268 211 245 55.61 10.8 9.3 1,954 901 162 218 53.89 12.1 9.0
Johnson C. Smith 67 1,459 804 111 117 55.11 13.1 12.5 1,389 705 130 144 49.24 10.7 9.6
Claflin 93 1,831 1,004 144 121 54.83 12.7 15.1 1,802 942 193 194 47.73 9.3 9.3
Virginia Union 67 1,103 584 65 100 52.95 17.0 11.0 1,089 551 149 147 49.40 7.3 7.4
Livingstone 69 1,226 666 104 127 54.32 11.8 9.7 1,264 695 106 116 45.02 11.9 10.9
Elizabeth City St. 80 1,438 777 140 145 54.03 10.3 9.9 1,575 897 182 157 43.05 8.7 10.0
Bowie St. 73 1,268 656 148 165 51.74 8.6 7.7 1,544 934 190 135 39.51 8.1 11.4
Lincoln (PA) 68 1,171 537 82 156 45.86 14.3 7.5 1,585 953 225 179 39.87 7.0 8.9
Saint Augustine's 55 250 5 55 96 2.00 4.5 2.6 1,879 1,878 125 130 0.05 15.0 14.5
Conference Average 78 1,499 809 133 155 49.83 11.6 10.0 1,576 884 156 157 44.49 10.5 10.2
  • 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 CIAA

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

61.87

2019-10-14 Fayetteville, NC
Fayetteville St.
Shaw
1
3
14
25
19
25
25
23
22
25
GAME

61.51

2019-10-20
Fayetteville St.
Virginia St.
3
2
25
17
25
19
25
27
21
25
15
9
GAME

60.54

2019-10-06 Ettrick,VA
Virginia St.
Shaw
2
3
25
23
21
25
25
16
10
25
12
15
GAME

57.56

2019-10-24 Fayetteville, NC
Fayetteville St.
Winston-Salem
3
0
27
25
25
16
25
22
GAME

57.31

2019-09-30 Raleigh, NC
Saint Augustine's
Winston-Salem
0
3
7
25
12
25
17
25
GAME

57.27

2019-11-11 Raleigh, NC
Shaw
Fayetteville St.
0
3
16
25
19
25
23
25
GAME

57.25

2019-09-26 Winston-Salem, N.C.
Winston-Salem
Fayetteville St.
0
3
18
25
20
25
22
25
GAME

56.91

2019-11-12 Orangeburg, SC
Claflin
Fayetteville St.
0
3
19
25
10
25
23
25
GAME

56.81

2019-10-10 Winston-Salem, N.C.
Winston-Salem
Shaw
3
2
19
25
18
25
25
18
25
20
15
11
GAME

56.75

2019-11-22 Salem, VA
Virginia St.
Shaw
0
3
23
25
14
25
22
25

HuskerGeek CIAA All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
A
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 12.9633
2 11.4464
3 10.5292
4 10.4560
5 10.4262
6 10.0948
7 9.7728
8 9.4095
9 9.1793
10 9.1747

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 7.3377
2 6.7391
3 6.1537
4 6.0750
5 6.0263
6 5.8037
7 4.9949
8 4.8314
9 4.8199
10 4.7656

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 9.1933
2 9.1386
3 8.2246
4 8.1560
5 7.8238
6 7.1274
7 6.9183
8 6.7588
9 6.2026
10 6.0752

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.1473
2 0.1418
3 0.1407
4 0.1390
5 0.1383
6 0.1342
7 0.1341
8 0.1315
9 0.1293
10 0.1272

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.0907
2 0.0834
3 0.0831
4 0.0769
5 0.0749
6 0.0744
7 0.0732
8 0.0721
9 0.0685
10 0.0681

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1436
2 0.1398
3 0.1379
4 0.1265
5 0.1185
6 0.1142
7 0.1007
8 0.0985
9 0.0865
10 0.0842


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