Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

SCIAC - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 3
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Cal Lutheran 1,578.0820 1,583.7618 1,580.9193 61.43 71.50 0.297
2nd Claremont-M-S 1,548.6680 1,567.4953 1,558.0532 61.87 71.20 0.284
3rd La Verne 1,495.1462 1,523.0809 1,509.0489 57.72 70.33 0.242
4th Pomona-Pitzer 1,390.7807 1,419.9256 1,405.2776 54.28 60.92 0.125
5th Occidental 1,362.8605 1,401.1082 1,381.8520 52.13 61.60 0.126
6th Chapman 1,355.7505 1,403.4610 1,379.3995 54.00 59.79 0.102
7th Whittier 1,342.8608 1,375.8584 1,359.2595 52.12 57.89 0.100
8th Redlands 1,318.0347 1,341.3847 1,329.6584 51.29 58.38 0.070
9th Caltech 1,116.7178 1,148.7468 1,132.6191 39.14 46.98 -0.138

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 Cal Lutheran 0.3296 44.16 11.20 40.87 43.87 2.81 9.77
2nd Claremont-M-S 0.3276 42.99 10.23 40.55 43.89 3.29 10.66
3rd La Verne 0.3239 44.44 12.05 41.24 43.03 3.92 11.80
4th Occidental 0.2367 37.73 14.06 35.16 47.98 4.45 12.52
5th Pomona-Pitzer 0.2356 38.14 14.57 35.32 50.05 4.10 8.72
6th Whittier 0.2181 36.31 14.49 33.92 50.71 3.23 8.41
7th Chapman 0.2175 37.45 15.70 34.74 45.71 6.07 9.55
8th Redlands 0.2096 35.74 14.77 32.91 51.64 3.75 11.72
9th Caltech 0.0768 25.78 18.11 23.64 61.24 4.36 9.65

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Cal Lutheran 0.0328 22.98 19.69 21.50 60.32 7.09 4.16
2nd Claremont-M-S 0.0434 19.63 15.29 18.33 69.01 4.69 3.10
3rd La Verne 0.0817 26.66 18.49 24.59 61.71 6.39 3.39
4th Occidental 0.1107 27.90 16.83 25.93 58.46 3.68 7.64
5th Pomona-Pitzer 0.1108 28.29 17.21 26.07 58.08 4.64 5.40
6th Chapman 0.1159 29.00 17.41 26.65 58.36 4.72 6.59
7th Whittier 0.1185 28.68 16.82 26.82 55.83 5.00 7.92
8th Redlands 0.1394 30.25 16.30 27.98 57.24 4.47 7.94
9th Caltech 0.2151 36.80 15.29 34.20 53.11 1.89 12.70

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,404.0097 1,417.5070 1,406.9675 1,388.8430 1,404.3318
Difference 13.4973 2.9578 -15.1667 0.4295

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Claremont-M-S 92 1,831 974 175 109 53.20 10.5 16.8 1,426 546 86 119 61.71 16.6 12.0
Cal Lutheran 108 2,569 1,330 191 161 51.77 13.5 16.0 2,072 797 122 219 61.54 17.0 9.5
La Verne 100 1,859 936 221 213 50.35 8.4 8.7 1,555 608 99 162 60.90 15.7 9.6
Pomona-Pitzer 94 1,685 809 150 146 48.01 11.2 11.5 1,651 777 151 177 52.94 10.9 9.3
Chapman 82 1,802 859 146 140 47.67 12.3 12.9 1,786 849 159 165 52.46 11.2 10.8
Occidental 87 1,741 798 193 186 45.84 9.0 9.4 1,752 816 171 148 53.43 10.2 11.8
Redlands 91 1,569 731 220 182 46.59 7.1 8.6 1,658 818 186 188 50.66 8.9 8.8
Whittier 93 1,898 856 129 138 45.10 14.7 13.8 2,071 1,045 206 168 49.54 10.1 12.3
Caltech 54 725 235 65 99 32.41 11.2 7.3 1,230 762 192 124 38.05 6.4 9.9
Conference Average 89 1,742 836 166 153 46.77 10.9 11.7 1,689 780 152 163 53.47 11.9 10.5
  • 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 SCIAC

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

74.35

2016-10-18 Claremont, CA
Claremont-M-S
La Verne
2
3
25
20
25
21
24
26
21
25
10
15
GAME

72.74

2016-09-24 Claremont, CA
Claremont-M-S
Cal Lutheran
3
1
15
25
25
22
26
24
25
19
GAME

72.40

2016-09-30 La Verne, CA
La Verne
Cal Lutheran
3
1
23
25
25
20
29
27
25
22
GAME

71.74

2016-11-03 Claremont, CA
Claremont-M-S
La Verne
3
1
27
29
25
23
25
19
25
16
GAME

70.17

2016-10-21 Thousand Oaks, CA
Cal Lutheran
Claremont-M-S
3
0
25
16
25
23
25
18
GAME

68.83

2016-11-05 Thousand Oaks, CA
Cal Lutheran
Claremont-M-S
3
0
25
23
25
19
25
16
GAME

68.76

2016-10-29 Claremont, CA
Pomona-Pitzer
Cal Lutheran
1
3
21
25
25
21
13
25
17
25
GAME

68.72

2016-09-24 Orange,CA
Chapman
Pomona-Pitzer
3
0
25
22
29
27
26
24
GAME

66.83

2016-10-04 Thousand Oaks, CA
Cal Lutheran
Pomona-Pitzer
3
0
25
19
26
24
25
22
GAME

66.75

2016-10-15 Claremont, CA
Pomona-Pitzer
Whittier
3
1
25
18
26
28
25
18
25
23

HuskerGeek SCIAC All-Conference

1st Team

Name Team Role
A
A
A
A
D
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 21.1810
2 18.0056
3 16.0015
4 15.8839
5 15.0110
6 14.5091
7 13.9178
8 13.6475
9 12.9029
10 12.8089

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 12.9389
2 12.0174
3 9.7711
4 9.7686
5 9.0333
6 8.7581
7 8.5236
8 8.2234
9 7.7835
10 7.6791

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 14.5562
2 11.1435
3 9.7836
4 9.2809
5 9.1636
6 8.2205
7 8.2049
8 7.8983
9 7.8616
10 7.3707

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2206
2 0.2056
3 0.1792
4 0.1783
5 0.1750
6 0.1749
7 0.1740
8 0.1644
9 0.1636
10 0.1621

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1281
2 0.1269
3 0.1255
4 0.1252
5 0.1167
6 0.1112
7 0.1109
8 0.1067
9 0.0947
10 0.0886

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1548
2 0.1456
3 0.1223
4 0.1140
5 0.1126
6 0.1090
7 0.1075
8 0.1067
9 0.0949
10 0.0934


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