Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

Great Northeast - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 3
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st JWU (Providence) 1,524.4987 1,521.8148 1,523.1562 55.74 69.88 0.245
2nd Rivier 1,324.7404 1,340.5197 1,332.6067 48.21 56.50 0.066
3rd Simmons 1,235.1432 1,255.5646 1,245.3120 43.59 52.59 -0.038
4th Colby-Sawyer 1,199.5009 1,224.0919 1,211.7340 42.39 50.78 -0.076
5th Emmanuel (MA) 1,153.0790 1,196.5549 1,174.6158 41.51 46.97 -0.146
6th Lasell 1,152.9794 1,187.6443 1,170.1835 41.08 46.43 -0.145
7th Suffolk 1,124.5556 1,165.4710 1,144.8306 38.55 46.70 -0.122
8th Regis (MA) 1,114.2349 1,160.7479 1,137.2536 40.84 44.57 -0.120
9th Norwich 1,103.8807 1,162.3264 1,132.7266 37.96 46.94 -0.141
10th St. Joseph's (ME) 1,062.8076 1,111.0661 1,086.6690 37.44 44.13 -0.173
11th Albertus Magnus 1,040.4799 1,081.2606 1,060.6743 35.10 41.51 -0.227
12th St. Joseph (CT) 1,010.0561 1,060.7101 1,035.0733 35.86 40.08 -0.256
13th Anna Maria 829.0424 886.2144 857.1518 29.58 27.58 -0.442

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 JWU (Providence) 0.3248 43.14 10.66 40.13 46.28 1.97 8.77
2nd Rivier 0.1827 36.43 18.17 34.72 49.59 4.44 8.96
3rd Simmons 0.1345 31.22 17.77 29.87 52.50 5.41 11.44
4th Colby-Sawyer 0.1220 27.86 15.66 25.62 58.96 4.32 9.38
5th Regis (MA) 0.0863 27.13 18.50 25.43 61.18 4.58 7.89
6th Emmanuel (MA) 0.0845 26.05 17.60 24.19 59.67 5.59 7.12
7th Norwich 0.0813 26.17 18.04 24.82 62.49 5.31 5.78
8th Suffolk 0.0786 26.79 18.92 25.25 58.12 4.66 7.18
9th Lasell 0.0664 26.25 19.61 24.33 61.40 4.45 8.24
10th St. Joseph's (ME) 0.0525 24.04 18.80 23.30 63.81 4.85 6.85
11th Albertus Magnus 0.0329 21.75 18.46 20.55 66.22 4.80 5.95
12th St. Joseph (CT) -0.0068 21.09 21.77 19.47 66.37 5.23 6.66
13th Anna Maria -0.0982 13.53 23.34 11.56 75.04 5.82 7.14

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st JWU (Providence) 0.0795 24.73 16.77 22.86 61.72 4.34 5.48
2nd Rivier 0.1162 29.49 17.87 27.54 56.60 5.89 7.43
3rd Simmons 0.1729 32.94 15.65 30.66 54.11 4.31 9.69
4th Colby-Sawyer 0.1979 35.30 15.51 32.55 51.80 3.61 9.76
5th Suffolk 0.2003 34.84 14.80 32.19 50.43 3.46 10.10
6th Regis (MA) 0.2062 38.28 17.66 35.81 46.09 5.51 12.09
7th Lasell 0.2115 35.52 14.37 32.97 53.39 2.10 11.01
8th Norwich 0.2226 37.16 14.90 35.06 49.89 2.95 13.71
9th St. Joseph's (ME) 0.2250 37.10 14.61 34.55 51.74 3.14 12.38
10th Emmanuel (MA) 0.2305 37.79 14.75 35.05 48.61 2.75 8.75
11th St. Joseph (CT) 0.2488 38.83 13.95 36.10 48.83 2.50 13.00
12th Albertus Magnus 0.2598 39.02 13.04 36.45 50.46 0.72 13.70
13th Anna Maria 0.3435 47.46 13.11 41.51 37.84 1.27 22.20

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,162.4606 1,157.4254 1,151.5555 1,151.1447 1,155.6465
Difference -5.0352 -10.9051 -11.3158 -9.0854

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
JWU (Providence) 107 2,489 1,355 232 182 54.44 10.7 13.7 1,789 626 110 188 65.01 16.3 9.5
Rivier 120 2,628 1,381 328 318 52.55 8.0 8.3 2,205 933 171 229 57.69 12.9 9.6
Norwich 92 1,940 990 210 207 51.03 9.2 9.4 1,797 841 232 223 53.20 7.7 8.1
Colby-Sawyer 119 2,557 1,245 298 287 48.69 8.6 8.9 2,478 1,149 236 254 53.63 10.5 9.8
Simmons 104 2,264 1,091 299 352 48.19 7.6 6.4 2,188 1,012 225 238 53.75 9.7 9.2
Albertus Magnus 101 2,054 1,012 222 240 49.27 9.3 8.6 2,112 1,070 271 240 49.34 7.8 8.8
Lasell 110 2,035 985 247 211 48.40 8.2 9.6 2,132 1,089 253 256 48.92 8.4 8.3
Emmanuel (MA) 93 1,890 900 184 127 47.62 10.3 14.9 1,989 1,005 178 199 49.47 11.2 10.0
Regis (MA) 100 2,001 975 226 218 48.73 8.9 9.2 2,128 1,104 246 188 48.12 8.7 11.3
St. Joseph (CT) 96 1,966 952 226 200 48.42 8.7 9.8 2,131 1,122 253 254 47.35 8.4 8.4
Suffolk 102 2,076 953 221 273 45.91 9.4 7.6 2,245 1,129 220 256 49.71 10.2 8.8
St. Joseph's (ME) 99 1,688 759 189 216 44.96 8.9 7.8 1,918 998 262 237 47.97 7.3 8.1
Anna Maria 89 1,303 560 186 163 42.98 7.0 8.0 2,098 1,388 441 232 33.84 4.8 9.0
Conference Average 102 2,069 1,012 236 230 48.55 8.8 9.4 2,093 1,036 238 230 50.61 9.5 9.1
  • 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 Great Northeast

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

61.45

2018-11-03 Providence, RI
JWU (Providence)
Rivier
3
0
25
17
25
17
25
18
GAME

60.76

2018-10-13 Providence, RI
JWU (Providence)
Rivier
3
0
25
19
25
17
25
17
GAME

59.65

2018-10-20 Boston, Mass.
Emmanuel (MA)
Colby-Sawyer
2
3
25
23
23
25
25
23
23
25
8
15
GAME

58.13

2018-10-17 Newton, Mass.
Lasell
JWU (Providence)
0
3
9
25
23
25
9
25
GAME

57.83

2018-10-03 Providence, RI
JWU (Providence)
Emmanuel (MA)
3
0
25
20
25
11
25
13
GAME

57.67

2018-10-06 Boston, Mass.
Simmons
Colby-Sawyer
1
3
25
16
21
25
26
28
19
25
GAME

57.61

2018-10-30 New London, NH
Colby-Sawyer
Simmons
3
1
25
20
26
24
23
25
25
23
GAME

57.37

2018-09-08 New London, NH
Colby-Sawyer
JWU (Providence)
0
3
16
25
15
25
16
25
GAME

57.33

2018-09-14 Northfield, Vt.
Norwich
JWU (Providence)
0
3
16
25
10
25
20
25
GAME

57.21

2018-09-29 Weston, Mass.
Simmons
JWU (Providence)
0
3
6
25
11
25
18
25

HuskerGeek Great Northeast 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 17.8849
2 16.1947
3 15.5799
4 15.2660
5 14.9832
6 14.9656
7 14.9429
8 14.8313
9 14.7308
10 14.5645

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 11.0007
2 10.0785
3 9.6228
4 8.6293
5 8.5126
6 8.1544
7 7.2443
8 7.1366
9 7.0843
10 7.0836

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 14.1188
2 12.6911
3 12.5833
4 12.5096
5 12.0064
6 11.2786
7 10.7659
8 10.4523
9 10.3080
10 9.5808

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.1731
2 0.1723
3 0.1687
4 0.1545
5 0.1541
6 0.1533
7 0.1498
8 0.1481
9 0.1468
10 0.1452

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1072
2 0.1038
3 0.0992
4 0.0928
5 0.0927
6 0.0896
7 0.0852
8 0.0787
9 0.0746
10 0.0742

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1526
2 0.1308
3 0.1295
4 0.1259
5 0.1228
6 0.1225
7 0.1222
8 0.1175
9 0.1167
10 0.1074


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