Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

Landmark - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 3
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Juniata 1,477.0686 1,462.2259 1,469.6285 58.53 68.17 0.244
2nd Susquehanna 1,394.6684 1,400.2299 1,397.4464 54.32 64.75 0.157
3rd Scranton 1,287.0306 1,284.0290 1,285.5289 50.10 57.12 0.087
4th Catholic 1,262.1186 1,251.2919 1,256.6936 47.89 54.93 0.038
5th Elizabethtown 1,246.7237 1,256.2058 1,251.4558 48.19 55.15 0.032
6th Moravian 1,244.9989 1,240.6521 1,242.8236 48.22 55.25 0.018
7th Merchant Marine 1,196.6681 1,192.7422 1,194.7035 45.14 48.50 -0.018
8th Goucher 1,145.6940 1,145.2720 1,145.4830 44.16 47.93 -0.084

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 Juniata 0.2913 42.26 13.12 39.01 43.87 3.05 12.31
2nd Susquehanna 0.2576 38.99 13.23 35.89 45.41 4.06 11.45
3rd Scranton 0.2120 34.51 13.31 31.55 54.40 4.72 10.86
4th Catholic 0.1921 34.03 14.82 31.14 55.28 5.72 6.56
5th Moravian 0.1677 32.06 15.28 29.38 50.79 4.21 10.37
6th Elizabethtown 0.1497 30.90 15.93 28.30 52.63 4.21 9.03
7th Merchant Marine 0.1343 29.02 15.59 23.88 49.66 3.97 10.53
8th Goucher 0.1066 27.00 16.34 24.32 61.99 4.42 9.49

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Juniata 0.0473 23.03 18.30 21.13 63.88 5.70 4.48
2nd Susquehanna 0.1001 26.60 16.59 24.55 63.43 4.92 5.00
3rd Elizabethtown 0.1181 29.29 17.48 26.84 58.59 5.05 6.32
4th Scranton 0.1254 30.07 17.52 27.39 57.13 6.14 6.47
5th Moravian 0.1496 31.51 16.55 29.54 55.80 3.76 7.56
6th Merchant Marine 0.1524 30.97 15.73 28.28 52.35 4.36 12.30
7th Catholic 0.1539 32.10 16.72 29.28 47.68 5.32 8.77
8th Goucher 0.1902 35.89 16.87 32.45 51.66 3.42 10.49

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,280.4704 1,271.4420 1,259.1255 1,254.0747 1,266.2781
Difference -9.0284 -21.3449 -26.3957 -18.9230

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Susquehanna 132 2,005 1,030 272 261 51.37 7.4 7.7 1,666 677 164 235 59.36 10.2 7.1
Merchant Marine 98 1,041 577 322 217 55.43 3.2 4.8 894 428 168 196 52.13 5.3 4.6
Scranton 124 1,313 670 275 311 51.03 4.8 4.2 1,189 526 204 236 55.76 5.8 5.0
Juniata 124 2,236 1,085 271 238 48.52 8.3 9.4 2,031 862 164 249 57.56 12.4 8.2
Catholic 134 1,438 691 206 157 48.05 7.0 9.2 1,430 682 259 254 52.31 5.5 5.6
Moravian 118 1,596 769 234 257 48.18 6.8 6.2 1,585 765 191 229 51.74 8.3 6.9
Elizabethtown 117 2,088 956 206 243 45.79 10.1 8.6 2,200 1,074 194 212 51.18 11.3 10.4
Goucher 109 1,545 725 208 198 46.93 7.4 7.8 1,722 913 272 219 46.98 6.3 7.9
Conference Average 120 1,658 813 249 235 49.41 6.9 7.2 1,590 741 202 229 53.38 8.1 7.0
  • 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 Landmark

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

67.29

2014-11-08
Juniata
Susquehanna
3
0
25
22
26
24
27
25
GAME

59.01

2014-10-04 Towson, Md.
Catholic
Juniata
0
3
19
25
22
25
19
25
GAME

58.06

2014-10-04 Towson, Md.
Catholic
Susquehanna
0
3
16
25
20
25
20
25
GAME

57.92

2014-09-27 Huntingdon, Pa.
Moravian
Susquehanna
1
3
14
25
16
25
25
17
16
25
GAME

57.80

2014-11-04
Juniata
Moravian
3
0
25
7
25
22
25
17
GAME

57.69

2014-10-04 Bethlehem, Pa.
Moravian
Scranton
2
3
25
9
21
25
21
25
25
21
10
15
GAME

57.05

2014-09-27
Juniata
Moravian
3
0
25
17
25
19
25
12
GAME

56.90

2014-09-27 Huntingdon, Pa.
Juniata
Elizabethtown
3
0
25
13
25
14
25
19
GAME

56.57

2014-09-23 Elizabethtown, Pa.
Elizabethtown
Moravian
1
3
23
25
25
22
21
25
19
25
GAME

56.29

2014-09-27 Huntingdon, Pa.
Elizabethtown
Susquehanna
0
4
19
25
19
25
11
25
0
0

HuskerGeek Landmark 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 15.6075
2 15.5264
3 14.1087
4 14.0596
5 14.0439
6 12.8949
7 11.4727
8 10.6881
9 10.5694
10 9.6339

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 11.5996
2 9.9932
3 8.7270
4 7.1061
5 6.9401
6 6.9267
7 6.5962
8 6.2065
9 5.8842
10 5.7964

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 14.1102
2 11.4505
3 9.9518
4 8.2628
5 8.1565
6 7.8267
7 6.6518
8 6.5519
9 6.4396
10 5.7887

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.1978
2 0.1850
3 0.1670
4 0.1645
5 0.1626
6 0.1603
7 0.1590
8 0.1526
9 0.1499
10 0.1482

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1179
2 0.1160
3 0.1148
4 0.1099
5 0.1075
6 0.0999
7 0.0913
8 0.0905
9 0.0905
10 0.0904

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1470
2 0.1301
3 0.1199
4 0.1087
5 0.1072
6 0.1005
7 0.0979
8 0.0842
9 0.0824
10 0.0820


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