Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

Northeast - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 1
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st LIU Brooklyn 1,388.6836 1,375.4052 1,382.0285 43.04 57.40 -0.003
2nd Central Conn. St. 1,265.5941 1,280.6871 1,273.1183 37.58 52.62 -0.112
3rd Robert Morris 1,252.5807 1,259.4823 1,256.0268 37.07 51.23 -0.130
4th Saint Francis (PA) 1,225.1018 1,214.1749 1,219.6261 35.31 49.73 -0.135
5th Sacred Heart 1,219.1715 1,201.7873 1,210.4482 34.91 52.09 -0.161
6th Bryant 1,174.9647 1,165.9613 1,170.4543 32.83 47.62 -0.194
7th Fairleigh Dickinson 1,152.9197 1,141.8827 1,147.3880 32.74 46.46 -0.220
8th St. Francis Brooklyn 1,100.8436 1,080.2604 1,090.5034 30.54 44.79 -0.261
9th Quinnipiac 1,048.1651 1,033.5800 1,040.8470 28.09 39.58 -0.326

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 LIU Brooklyn 0.2054 36.45 15.91 34.33 47.37 7.35 6.20
2nd Central Conn. St. 0.1527 32.25 16.98 30.28 51.70 7.70 4.71
3rd Robert Morris 0.1290 29.55 16.64 28.20 53.32 6.74 4.09
4th Saint Francis (PA) 0.1269 32.50 19.81 30.04 51.54 6.39 7.18
5th Sacred Heart 0.1100 32.39 21.39 30.59 48.59 10.21 5.92
6th Fairleigh Dickinson 0.0993 27.15 17.21 25.42 57.19 6.80 5.59
7th Bryant 0.0969 29.14 19.45 27.13 52.91 7.01 5.06
8th St. Francis Brooklyn 0.0701 24.64 17.63 23.28 59.34 7.60 4.48
9th Quinnipiac 0.0014 22.86 22.72 21.10 61.95 7.90 4.92

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st LIU Brooklyn 0.2086 35.75 14.89 33.38 49.15 5.84 5.72
2nd Robert Morris 0.2589 40.64 14.75 37.56 45.19 4.88 5.23
3rd Saint Francis (PA) 0.2614 38.38 12.24 35.68 48.54 2.67 7.25
4th Central Conn. St. 0.2645 40.73 14.28 37.66 45.36 5.00 6.16
5th Sacred Heart 0.2714 38.41 11.27 35.57 51.37 1.96 5.54
6th Bryant 0.2908 42.72 13.64 39.07 43.73 4.72 7.11
7th Fairleigh Dickinson 0.3196 43.44 11.47 39.99 44.73 3.37 7.89
8th Quinnipiac 0.3279 46.19 13.41 42.82 40.09 4.03 8.58
9th St. Francis Brooklyn 0.3310 45.59 12.49 42.64 41.32 3.87 8.24

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,198.9378 1,195.3664 1,200.7887 1,200.1762 1,198.8173
Difference -3.5714 1.8508 1.2384 -0.1607

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
LIU Brooklyn 120 2,607 1,275 195 221 48.91 13.4 11.8 2,247 891 138 190 60.35 16.3 11.8
Central Conn. St. 116 2,602 1,187 157 141 45.62 16.6 18.5 2,467 1,050 157 224 57.44 15.7 11.0
Robert Morris 118 2,552 1,128 135 166 44.20 18.9 15.4 2,568 1,147 141 216 55.34 18.2 11.9
Saint Francis (PA) 117 2,312 990 213 320 42.82 10.9 7.2 2,406 1,097 184 224 54.41 13.1 10.7
Sacred Heart 104 2,013 834 149 255 41.43 13.5 7.9 2,116 945 128 209 55.34 16.5 10.1
Bryant 120 2,519 1,052 168 233 41.76 15.0 10.8 2,724 1,267 193 214 53.49 14.1 12.7
Fairleigh Dickinson 111 2,268 948 164 209 41.80 13.8 10.9 2,492 1,184 195 216 52.49 12.8 11.5
St. Francis Brooklyn 120 2,061 790 141 174 38.33 14.6 11.8 2,480 1,246 221 281 49.76 11.2 8.8
Quinnipiac 82 1,186 426 85 194 35.92 14.0 6.1 1,636 901 177 180 44.93 9.2 9.1
Conference Average 112 2,236 959 156 213 42.31 14.5 11.2 2,348 1,081 170 217 53.73 14.1 10.9
  • 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 Northeast

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

66.32

2012-11-18 Brooklyn, N.Y.
LIU Brooklyn
Central Conn. St.
3
1
22
25
25
22
25
23
25
22
GAME

61.52

2012-09-22 Brooklyn, N.Y.
LIU Brooklyn
Sacred Heart
3
2
25
22
25
17
23
25
21
25
15
10
GAME

61.23

2012-11-03 New Britain, CT
Central Conn. St.
LIU Brooklyn
2
3
25
18
16
25
25
18
15
25
8
15
GAME

60.61

2012-11-17 Brooklyn, N.Y.
Central Conn. St.
Robert Morris
3
1
25
23
25
17
13
25
25
21
GAME

60.50

2012-10-27 Moon Township, Pa.
Robert Morris
Central Conn. St.
3
1
25
18
25
23
24
26
25
23
GAME

60.47

2012-09-23 Loretto, Pa.
Saint Francis (PA)
Bryant
3
2
25
27
23
25
28
26
25
23
16
14
GAME

60.42

2012-11-11 Brooklyn, N.Y.
LIU Brooklyn
Robert Morris
3
1
25
13
25
19
18
25
25
18
GAME

59.06

2012-11-17
LIU Brooklyn
Saint Francis (PA)
3
1
28
30
25
18
25
16
25
14
GAME

58.88

2012-09-29 New Britain, CT
Central Conn. St.
Robert Morris
0
3
21
25
22
25
22
25
GAME

58.59

2012-10-07 Moon Township, Pa.
Robert Morris
LIU Brooklyn
0
3
23
25
15
25
21
25

HuskerGeek 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 25.2687
2 23.9932
3 23.7113
4 21.9834
5 21.6168
6 19.9448
7 19.6885
8 17.3536
9 16.7441
10 15.9881

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 15.9995
2 15.0369
3 14.3614
4 14.1137
5 12.9687
6 11.5336
7 11.0386
8 10.2242
9 9.4171
10 9.1493

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 13.5640
2 13.4393
3 12.9992
4 11.9046
5 11.1550
6 10.4207
7 10.4192
8 10.1042
9 9.9218
10 9.3606

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2430
2 0.2086
3 0.2044
4 0.1995
5 0.1880
6 0.1863
7 0.1797
8 0.1774
9 0.1738
10 0.1440

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1379
2 0.1357
3 0.1308
4 0.1249
5 0.1175
6 0.1168
7 0.1040
8 0.0994
9 0.0977
10 0.0969

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1189
2 0.1149
3 0.1130
4 0.1075
5 0.1073
6 0.1072
7 0.0922
8 0.0921
9 0.0906
10 0.0863


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