Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

G-MAC - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 2
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Cedarville 1,505.8581 1,488.2160 1,497.0111 48.29 58.79 0.078
2nd Trevecca Nazarene 1,472.9190 1,457.2489 1,465.0630 44.65 58.54 -0.005
3rd Davis & Elkins 1,386.4735 1,388.0700 1,387.2715 42.94 51.31 -0.045
4th Ursuline 1,383.7465 1,358.8119 1,371.2226 40.47 52.46 -0.058
5th Ky. Wesleyan 1,344.5917 1,349.1179 1,346.8529 41.20 49.39 -0.100
6th Alderson Broaddus 1,302.0475 1,302.1754 1,302.1115 38.00 49.72 -0.123
7th Ohio Valley 1,282.4446 1,300.9512 1,291.6648 38.86 49.32 -0.113
8th Salem Int'l 1,125.7921 1,143.4822 1,134.6027 31.80 35.88 -0.328

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 Cedarville 0.2371 37.67 13.96 35.22 48.64 4.80 7.98
2nd Trevecca Nazarene 0.1691 33.88 16.96 31.46 50.89 5.58 6.48
3rd Davis & Elkins 0.1660 31.65 15.05 29.42 55.83 4.96 6.91
4th Alderson Broaddus 0.1510 31.19 16.09 28.26 54.09 7.03 6.82
5th Ursuline 0.1414 29.66 15.52 27.77 57.83 5.05 6.22
6th Ky. Wesleyan 0.1099 29.56 18.57 27.32 53.52 4.93 6.42
7th Ohio Valley 0.1084 29.63 18.78 27.65 53.15 6.95 6.16
8th Salem Int'l 0.0161 24.17 22.56 23.21 62.25 6.43 6.82

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Cedarville 0.1593 32.97 17.04 30.80 49.93 6.47 5.13
2nd Trevecca Nazarene 0.1739 33.08 15.69 31.18 53.57 4.92 4.26
3rd Ursuline 0.1997 33.70 13.73 31.74 54.45 3.59 7.00
4th Ky. Wesleyan 0.2097 35.98 15.01 33.04 49.98 2.97 5.67
5th Davis & Elkins 0.2108 37.15 16.07 33.93 48.12 5.90 5.71
6th Ohio Valley 0.2213 35.71 13.58 33.35 52.12 3.22 8.37
7th Alderson Broaddus 0.2737 40.43 13.06 36.56 47.57 4.61 10.45
8th Salem Int'l 0.3439 47.12 12.73 42.96 40.53 2.01 12.39

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,349.4750 1,360.6977 1,351.8646 1,359.0377 1,355.2688
Difference 11.2227 2.3896 9.5627 7.7250

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Cedarville 120 2,738 1,322 217 252 48.28 12.6 10.9 2,497 1,069 134 200 57.19 18.6 12.5
Trevecca Nazarene 107 2,234 1,008 149 180 45.12 15.0 12.4 2,148 911 98 189 57.59 21.9 11.4
Ursuline 109 2,102 983 187 238 46.77 11.2 8.8 2,042 918 175 158 55.04 11.7 12.9
Davis & Elkins 124 2,556 1,188 202 206 46.48 12.7 12.4 2,622 1,256 150 208 52.10 17.5 12.6
Ky. Wesleyan 86 1,783 823 133 165 46.16 13.4 10.8 1,852 896 110 143 51.62 16.8 13.0
Alderson Broaddus 123 2,126 886 173 197 41.68 12.3 10.8 2,400 1,190 287 241 50.42 8.4 10.0
Ohio Valley 108 2,128 890 139 221 41.82 15.3 9.6 2,421 1,210 208 209 50.02 11.6 11.6
Salem Int'l 89 1,426 618 158 154 43.34 9.0 9.3 1,827 1,041 239 188 43.02 7.6 9.7
Conference Average 108 2,137 965 170 202 44.96 12.7 10.6 2,226 1,061 175 192 52.12 14.3 11.7
  • 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 G-MAC

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

70.09

2016-11-19 Mason, OH
Cedarville
Davis & Elkins
3
2
25
14
31
33
25
17
22
25
15
8
GAME

69.03

2016-10-08 Vienna, W.Va.
Ohio Valley
Ursuline
1
3
27
29
17
25
25
20
25
27
GAME

65.83

2016-10-29 Vienna, W. Va.
Ohio Valley
Trevecca Nazarene
3
2
23
25
25
15
25
19
23
25
15
13
GAME

65.70

2016-10-29
Ursuline
Davis & Elkins
0
3
24
26
27
29
24
26
GAME

65.37

2016-11-12 Philippi, WV
Alderson Broaddus
Ursuline
3
2
25
21
22
25
24
16
17
25
16
14
GAME

64.80

2016-10-28 Cedarville, OH
Cedarville
Trevecca Nazarene
3
0
25
17
25
23
25
20
GAME

64.76

2016-10-01 Nashville, TN
Trevecca Nazarene
Cedarville
3
0
25
17
25
17
28
26
GAME

64.70

2016-11-17 Mason, Ohio
Trevecca Nazarene
Ursuline
1
3
24
26
25
23
16
25
18
25
GAME

63.78

2016-11-04 Elkins, W.Va.
Davis & Elkins
Cedarville
0
3
22
25
20
25
23
25
GAME

63.28

2016-10-04 Philippi, WV
Alderson Broaddus
Davis & Elkins
3
2
26
28
13
25
25
20
25
22
15
13

HuskerGeek G-MAC All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
D
S

2nd Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
S
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 23.0123
2 20.8317
3 20.0316
4 19.5599
5 19.4707
6 18.1966
7 17.6454
8 17.5260
9 17.4663
10 17.3419

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 15.5482
2 13.5270
3 11.9356
4 11.7017
5 11.1405
6 10.5998
7 10.4364
8 10.4159
9 10.3295
10 10.2809

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 19.1478
2 16.1003
3 14.8859
4 13.1603
5 12.5223
6 11.3107
7 10.3604
8 10.3167
9 9.3705
10 9.2746

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.1945
2 0.1936
3 0.1934
4 0.1863
5 0.1857
6 0.1854
7 0.1816
8 0.1736
9 0.1700
10 0.1668

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1296
2 0.1170
3 0.1137
4 0.1112
5 0.1099
6 0.1061
7 0.0994
8 0.0983
9 0.0973
10 0.0939

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1824
2 0.1751
3 0.1342
4 0.1230
5 0.1170
6 0.1090
7 0.1016
8 0.1011
9 0.1006
10 0.0959


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