Nerdly Nebraska.

2023-2024 HuskerGeek Ratings Leaders

Sport School Rating
ViPR D1 Volleyball Wisconsin 1,711.3731

SoCon - Conference Overview

Conference Division: Division 1
Rnk. Team Résumé Recent ViPR Adj SP% Adj SO% Adj. Hit Mar.
1st Samford 1,601.2892 1,569.0815 1,585.1035 46.77 56.00 0.038
2nd ETSU 1,565.0459 1,529.1908 1,547.0145 46.28 53.71 -0.007
3rd Western Caro. 1,545.9366 1,510.9435 1,528.3399 46.89 50.20 -0.032
4th Furman 1,494.6163 1,460.1808 1,477.2983 40.78 51.49 -0.048
5th Wofford 1,489.2990 1,457.1974 1,473.1608 44.39 47.11 -0.059
6th Mercer 1,488.1165 1,456.0621 1,472.0020 42.80 46.06 -0.053
7th UNC Greensboro 1,460.7906 1,430.3684 1,445.4995 41.66 48.79 -0.093
8th Chattanooga 1,440.7638 1,410.2292 1,425.4148 43.99 45.91 -0.116
9th The Citadel 1,439.8794 1,401.7771 1,420.7005 36.72 48.29 -0.144

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 ETSU 0.2242 36.78 14.35 34.57 47.58 5.77 6.69
2nd Samford 0.2214 37.18 15.04 34.85 47.15 5.86 7.22
3rd Furman 0.1960 33.95 14.34 31.29 50.92 5.96 4.26
4th Western Caro. 0.1921 32.02 12.81 29.56 53.34 5.50 5.42
5th Mercer 0.1775 35.79 18.04 33.63 46.71 7.11 6.22
6th Wofford 0.1766 34.24 16.58 31.39 48.64 6.54 7.14
7th Chattanooga 0.1528 31.30 16.02 28.51 54.91 6.09 6.42
8th UNC Greensboro 0.1463 31.55 16.92 29.38 53.23 5.29 5.74
9th The Citadel 0.1181 29.71 17.90 27.63 55.35 6.65 6.77

ViPR Division Adjusted Defenses

Rnk. Team O_Hit% O_Kill% O_HE% O_AST% DIG% BLK% O_ACE%
1st Samford 0.1838 34.10 15.72 31.67 50.78 6.14 7.50
2nd Western Caro. 0.2243 35.60 13.17 32.52 50.33 3.53 6.36
3rd Mercer 0.2302 37.76 14.74 34.36 47.87 6.02 7.73
4th ETSU 0.2311 37.67 14.56 34.60 48.53 6.01 5.69
5th Wofford 0.2356 37.59 14.03 34.10 44.85 5.68 7.86
6th UNC Greensboro 0.2393 38.12 14.20 34.92 47.21 4.58 8.13
7th Furman 0.2436 38.21 13.85 35.00 46.84 5.41 7.91
8th The Citadel 0.2624 39.71 13.46 37.02 47.91 4.12 7.87
9th Chattanooga 0.2687 40.08 13.21 36.44 46.72 4.24 6.84

Conference Strength

Description Average Remove First and Last Remove Top and Bottom 2 Remove Top and Bottom 3 Composite
Scores 1,486.0593 1,481.2471 1,479.2601 1,474.1537 1,480.1801
Difference -4.8122 -6.7992 -11.9056 -7.8390

Point Totals

Offense Defense
Team Sets S SP SA SE SP% S/SA S/SE OS SPA SAA SEA SO% OS/SAA OS/SEA
Samford 110 2,280 1,143 177 238 50.13 12.9 9.6 2,061 900 163 203 56.33 12.6 10.2
ETSU 113 2,523 1,292 193 260 51.21 13.1 9.7 2,309 1,036 122 203 55.13 18.9 11.4
Western Caro. 113 2,454 1,271 146 156 51.79 16.8 15.7 2,361 1,135 148 226 51.93 16.0 10.4
Wofford 116 2,471 1,226 196 274 49.62 12.6 9.0 2,522 1,288 193 248 48.93 13.1 10.2
Mercer 110 2,389 1,168 162 308 48.89 14.7 7.8 2,402 1,250 168 212 47.96 14.3 11.3
Chattanooga 115 2,387 1,164 171 233 48.76 14.0 10.2 2,575 1,338 159 235 48.04 16.2 11.0
UNC Greensboro 97 2,017 938 133 210 46.51 15.2 9.6 2,147 1,077 172 189 49.84 12.5 11.4
The Citadel 108 2,240 1,006 174 259 44.91 12.9 8.6 2,404 1,173 183 229 51.21 13.1 10.5
Furman 104 2,238 994 99 142 44.42 22.6 15.8 2,379 1,152 185 220 51.58 12.9 10.8
Conference Average 110 2,333 1,134 161 231 48.47 15.0 10.7 2,351 1,150 166 218 51.22 14.4 10.8
  • 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 SoCon

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

75.76

2019-11-09 Greenville, S.C.
Furman
Samford
2
3
25
27
25
23
22
25
25
21
15
17
GAME

74.34

2019-10-04
Mercer
Western Caro.
2
3
23
25
28
26
25
21
21
25
12
15
GAME

72.90

2019-10-23
Chattanooga
Samford
2
3
25
23
25
21
24
26
17
25
12
15
GAME

72.56

2019-10-11
ETSU
Wofford
3
2
25
27
25
14
25
18
23
25
17
15
GAME

72.17

2019-09-27 Greenville, S.C.
Furman
ETSU
1
3
26
24
26
28
22
25
23
25
GAME

72.16

2019-11-13
ETSU
Western Caro.
3
1
23
25
25
21
25
22
25
18
GAME

72.13

2019-10-12
Chattanooga
Furman
2
3
27
25
25
16
31
33
23
25
11
15
GAME

71.61

2019-10-19 Birmingham, Ala.
Samford
Western Caro.
3
2
25
14
11
25
25
21
17
25
19
17
GAME

71.52

2019-11-08 Greenville, S.C.
Furman
Chattanooga
3
2
22
25
27
25
23
25
25
21
15
7
GAME

70.58

2019-10-18 Birmingham, Ala.
Samford
ETSU
2
3
21
25
23
25
25
22
25
19
12
15

HuskerGeek SoCon 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 22.4125
2 21.9295
3 21.0805
4 20.8348
5 19.6717
6 19.3892
7 19.3697
8 18.9823
9 18.6106
10 17.8228

Offensive WPA

Rk. Name Team OWPA
1 16.6183
2 13.5033
3 12.6630
4 12.1045
5 11.8208
6 11.6235
7 11.5685
8 11.1753
9 10.9611
10 10.7161

Defensive WPA

Rk. Name Team DWPA
1 19.1990
2 15.0962
3 13.6273
4 13.5751
5 12.5639
6 11.4256
7 11.4145
8 11.3657
9 11.2705
10 11.0968

WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team WPA/S
1 0.2151
2 0.2056
3 0.1994
4 0.1967
5 0.1937
6 0.1911
7 0.1896
8 0.1864
9 0.1823
10 0.1789

Offensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team OWPA/S
1 0.1511
2 0.1298
3 0.1292
4 0.1210
5 0.1162
6 0.1152
7 0.1105
8 0.1096
9 0.1085
10 0.1074

Defensive WPA Per Set

Rk. Name Team DWPA/S
1 0.1761
2 0.1429
3 0.1405
4 0.1313
5 0.1269
6 0.1222
7 0.1178
8 0.1138
9 0.1031
10 0.1019


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