2023 Volleyball Season

[flyingMoose]

More VT geek stuff-

500 simulations - % chance of finishing in the T45 in RPI:

SMU - 69.2%
Rice - 25.0%
Shockers - 6.0%
Tulsa - 4.8%
USF - 0.2%

[Kung Wu]

[flyingMoose]

September 25

Here are the top Pablo numbers in the AAC with last week's Pablo in parentheses.

6140 (5940) SMU
5850 (5770) Shockers
5760 (5730) Rice
5480 (5430) East Carolina
5395 (5360) Tulsa
5265 (5210) North Texas

Pablo is structured so that 5000 is an average team.


The VT geek that calculates an end-of-season RPI using the Pablo values has -

27 (34) SMU
41 (53) Rice
62 (71) Shockers
93 (88) Tulsa


and % chance of finishing in the T45 in RPI -

SMU - 98.2% (69.2%)
Rice - 54.0% (25.0%)
Shockers - 16.8% (6.0%)
Tulsa - 1.4% (4.8%)

[SubGod22]

Sunflower - 'A different season of my life': Transfer Barbara Koehler adjusts to volleyball at WSU

I can't seem to copy and paste anything from the article, but it's a nice little piece about adjusting to WSU and finding her place on the team. Some very kind words from Emerson about her and what she brings to the table.

[1972Shocker]

Emerson Wilford Leans Into a Bigger Role

https://goshockers.com/news/2023/9/29/volleyball-rh-shockers-play-at-smu-this-weekend.aspx

Two weeks ago, Izzi Strand and Emerson Wilford met for Boba tea and volleyball talk.

"We sat down, and we were like 'Hey, we've got this together," Strand said. "Our connection has gotten a lot better since then. We know how to talk to each other."

That conversation is part of Wilford's ongoing rise in stature for Shocker volleyball. Wilford, a sophomore outside hitter, is fourth on the team with 91 kills, averaging 2.12 a set, and fifth with 49 digs. She leads the Shockers with five solo blocks and is third with 28 block-assists.

"We were trying to find ways to get on the scoreboard more," Wilford said. "She was super-supportive and helpful. I feel like we've been connecting more – not that we weren't connecting before – but finding other ways."

That bond with teammates is part of the environment that drew Wilford to Wichita State from Laguna Hills, Calif. Her father, Marty, played professional hockey in the United States and Europe after being drafted by the Chicago Blackhawks. The family moved 19 times and spent three years in Germany.

When she evaluated schools, the atmosphere and coaches ranked higher than location on her list. Shocker coach Chris Lamb knew one of her coaches and asked about her at a tournament during freshman year in high school.

"I valued coaching, volleyball and the team," she said. "My dad valued all those things. We made life around the team. I love Wichita."

"She's learning how to stick to what her strengths are," Lamb said. "Depth. She can hit down the line. Tips and roll shots are getting better."

One of Lamb's teaching points for Wilford, who is hitting .159, is being smarter with her crosscourt shots and attack from different angles.

"We've been working on different types of sets, trying to get me to move around more so I'm not just getting the same ball," Wilford said. "If you look back at last year, I don't think I tipped a single ball."

[flyingMoose]

October 2

The first NCAA RPI is out. Through October 1.

37 Rice
39 SMU
53 Tulsa
74 Shockers


Here are the top Pablo numbers in the AAC with last week's Pablo in parentheses.

6345 (6140) SMU
5945 (5850) Shockers
5830 (5760) Rice
5525 (5480) East Carolina
5450 (5395) Tulsa
5320 (5265) North Texas

Pablo is structured so that 5000 is an average team.


The VT geek that calculates an end-of-season RPI using the Pablo values has -

26 (27) SMU
38 (41) Rice
56 (62) Shockers
77 (93) Tulsa


and % chance of finishing in the T45 in RPI -

SMU - 100.0% (98.2%)
Rice - 63.2% (54.0%)
Shockers - 21.0% (16.8%)
Tulsa - 0.4% (1.4%)

[1972Shocker]

The Shocks RPI is not being helped by their non-conference opponents who are 75-74 collectively for a 50.3% winning percentage. Good chance that falls below .500 by the end of the year.

If the Shocks can split with Rice in Houston, and have SMU and Rice split their 2 matches, and win all of their other AAC matches maybe they would have a chance to go dancing. Not sure what the tie-breaking procedures will be with this year's setup but if this scenario played out and we end up with a 3-way between SMU, Rice and WSU the Shocks should get credit for having both of their losses on the road Admittedly, this is pretty much wishful thinking. I can see SMU and Rice navigating the rest of the conference unscathed. Seems like it might be too big of an ask for the Shockers to do the same.

The Shocks don't play Rice until the final weekend of the regular season with only a Wednesday Thanksgiving Eve home match remaining against UAB. A lot of work to do between now and then.

[flyingMoose]

The Shocks RPI is not being helped by their non-conference opponents who are 75-74 collectively for a 50.3% winning percentage. Good chance that falls below .500 by the end of the year.

True. I was going to look at the record for the Rice non-con schedule but never got around to it. I expect it to be much better.

[1972Shocker]

Looks like I was wrong about Kayce starting at Washington. At least initially. Kayce played in 6 of 11 sets WU played in its opening weekend against UTEP, SE Louisiana and Grambing and had a total of 26 assists. Still, for Kayce, a very good student, she got a great deal reportedly getting two years of grad school paid for 1 year of volleyball.

Washington lost to UTEP in 5. beat SE Louisiana in 4 and easily swept Grambling.

Checked how Kayce is doing at Washington to see if her playing time has changed much. It has not and perhaps has diminished even further since the begdinning of conference play. Kayce is the backup to 5-11 So. Molly Wilson. She did handle all the setting duties in Washington's final non-conference match, a 3-1 win over St. Mary's, where she was very good. In that match she had 44 assists, hit 3-0-7 = .429, had 14 digs, 2 service aces and 1 service error. Apparently, Wilson was dinged up.

Overall, she has played in 44 of Washington's 62 sets but appears to be relegated to mostly serving duties so far in PAC-12 play. In the 40 sets, excluding the St. Mary's match she has a total of 56 assists (all but 2 in the non-con) or 1.4 assists per set, 26 digs, 1 block solo and 1 block assist. On the season she has 13 service aces to 12 service errors.

Washington is off to a 1-4 start in the tough PAC-12 and Kayce did not play in their most recent match, a loss to Stanford. In the 4 conference matches she did see action in she played in a total of 14 sets recording only 2 assists, 1 service ace, 2 service errors and 2 digs.

I am wondering if Kayce that foot injury that kept her out of Spring practice might still be an issue for her.

Can't feel too bad for Kayce since she reportedly is getting 2 years of grad school paid for in exchange for 1 season of vollyball, apparently in a limited role. And I'm pretty sure Kayce values her educational opportunities every bit as much, and probably more, than her volleyball opportunities.

[1972Shocker]

RH: Galligan Helps Remake of Serving Strategy

A key figure in Wichita State's serving reset is sophomore Katie Galligan, who had to go through a reset herself.

Galligan, a defensive specialist from Omaha, wasn't happy with her playing time early in the season. Coach Chris Lamb watched her response to the setback.

"Katie didn't get what she wanted," Lamb said. "It's very difficult when you get less playing time when you get older. I've seen a lot of people react the wrong way. All Galligan did was improve as a competitor. She has raised her game."

"She's on roll," Lamb said. "She's found something and it's working for her. It's working for us."

Galligan worked through the disappointment of a reduced role after a freshman year in which she played in 28 of the team's 31 matches and finished with 118 digs, sixth on the team.

"I definitely felt frustration with myself and that I wasn't performing where I felt I had or I could," she said. "I put an emphasis on bringing energy to practice. Figuring out what I needed to do. Have more fun."

"She has made us better," Lamb said. "Her serving. Her passing. She had to get pushed and she had to push back. It's one of my favorite stories to see how react to tough results and battle back."

Galligan's jump-float serve fits how Lamb wants the Shockers to work. She keeps the ball in play, yet with enough wiggle to bother passers. The Shockers use a drill in practice where a missed serve gives the opposition two points.

"That puts pressure on you in practice, where I feel like it's easy, sometimes, to get carried away with being too aggressive," Galligan said. "In the games, it's focusing on making the other team uncomfortable."

Lamb pulled back Shocker servers after statistics told him opponents passed too effectively earlier in the season. He feels confident in Wichita State's game in other aspects, so the numbers told him to tell his servers to back off high-risk serves and put the ball in play.

"We weren't trying to blow anybody up back there," he said. "If you think you're the better team at playing volleyball, then let's get it started and not miss as much. Let's just get the rally going. Let's make them make more contacts."

[flyingMoose]

October 9

The NCAA RPI through October 8.

32 SMU
41 Rice
55 Shockers


Here are the top Pablo numbers in the AAC with last week's Pablo in parentheses.

6310 (6345) SMU
6135 (5945) Shockers
6040 (5830) Rice
5535 (5450) Tulsa
5410 (5525) East Carolina
5535 (5450) Tulsa
5255 (5120) USF
5245 (5320) North Texas

Pablo is structured so that 5000 is an average team.


The VT geek that calculates an end-of-season RPI using the Pablo values has -

26 (26) SMU
32 (38) Rice
53 (56) Shockers


[OLD]
and % chance of finishing in the T45 in RPI -

SMU - 100.0% (98.2%)
Rice - 63.2% (54.0%)
Shockers - 21.0% (16.8%)
Tulsa - 0.4% (1.4%)
[OLD]

[Critter's Pa]

6310 (6345) SMU
6135 (5945) Shockers

The split with SMU helped us more than it hurt SMU. I know there is more to the changes than just the two games, but it has to be a significant part of the 190 point jump this week.

[flyingMoose]

Okay, boys and girls, here is some more stuff from VT.


There is a different geek who starts speculating on the NCAA Bracket about now. Of course, this is still quite early, but he is pretty accurate. The worst he has ever done is miss two teams? Something like that. And that only once.


Notes of interest from October 8


AAC
SMU isn't out of the running for a Top 16 seed (yet), but they need things to go their way, like others losing, Baylor and Florida State ending up as Top 25 wins. I have Rice in as a Top 32 seed right now (just barely), but I'm not so confident in that. There's not many clear contenders and I think Rice gains a couple significant wins from SMU/Wichita State in order to earn it.

Wichita State is in the running for an at-large, but they're also in the running to *win* the conference. They picked up a huge split *at* SMU. Does anyone have the AAC Manual or Tie-breakers they could send to me? It was public a few years back, but I haven't dug deep for it yet.

In the At-Large Hunt/Keep an eye on:
Wichita State, Indiana, UTEP, California, Clemson, UCLA, Utah, Colorado, Duke



And then another poster offered an answer to the tie-breaker question-


This is from last year, but probably hasn't changed.

Two-team tie:
1. Results of head-to-head match record during the regular season.
2. Results of head-to-head set record during the regular season.
3. Results of head-to-head point differential during the regular season.
4. Each team's record vs. the team occupying the highest position in the final regular-season standings (or
in the case of a tie for the championship, the next highest position in the regular-season standings),
continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.
a. When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team's record
against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tie-breaking procedures), rather
than the performance against the individual tied teams.
b. When comparing records against a single team or a group of teams, the higher winning percentage
shall prevail, even if the number of sets played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is
better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0).
5. Won-loss percentage of all Division I opponents.
6. Coin toss conducted by the Commissioner or designee.

3+ team tie:
1. Results of head-to-head match during the regular season.
2. Results of head-to-head set record during the regular season.
3. Results of head-to-head point differential during the regular season.
a. When comparing records against the tied teams, the team with the higher winning percentage
shall prevail, even if the number of sets played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is
better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0).
b. After the top team among the tied teams is determined, the second team is ranked by its record
among the original tied teams, not the head-to-head record vs. the remaining team(s).
4. If the remaining teams are still tied, the tied teams then begin the tie-breaking procedure from the
beginning.
5. If the remaining teams are still tied, the tied teams’ record shall be compared to the team occupying
the highest position in the final regular-season standings, continuing down through the standings until
one team gains an advantage.
a. When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team's record
against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tie-breaking procedures), rather
than the performance against the individual tied teams.
b. When comparing records against a single team or group of teams, the higher winning percentage
shall prevail, even if the number of sets played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is
better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0).
6. Won-loss percentage of Division I opponents.
7. Coin toss conducted by Commissioner or designee.

theamerican.org/documents/2022/8/4//2022_23_Policy_Manual_VOLLEYBALL.pdf?id=8974

So SMU would hold the 2-way tie-breaker over Wichita since they won in 3 and lost in 4.

[flyingMoose]

There is still no update on the % chance of making the T45 in RPI.


Ahh, but there is some discussion on VT about KPI!! Apparently, this is part of a "Primary Criteria" tool kit the NCAA Committee uses. KPI is new to the kit this year. It factors in Home/Away (which RPI does not do) and set results. That is, 3-0, 3-1, and 3-2. RPI only uses W/L. I don't think it replaces RPI; it is an addition. No one seems to know exactly how KPI is calculated. This is already more than I know, but one poster notes that ...

Interestingly, KPI's biggest changes from RPI are in the benefit of mid-major teams, and at the expense of P5 teams. Coincidence? We'll have to see more data. From the top 64 RPI teams, here is what I see:

KPI *likes* these teams:
Hawaii: KPI + 21
Western Michigan: KPI + 15
UCLA: KPI +14
Wichita State: KPI +14


The +14 means the Shocks are fourteen spots higher in KPI as compared to RPI? Yes, it does. The RPI slot for the Shockers is 55 per figstats. The KPI slot is 41. At the moment, I don't think I could tolerate the brain freeze that would result from trying to explore KPI any further, but for those with a stronger constitution ...

KPI: faktorsports.com/

Ok, the RPI/KPI for SMU is 32/34, and for Rice is 41/36.

[WuDrWu]

There is still no update on the % chance of making the T45 in RPI.


Ahh, but there is some discussion on VT about KPI!! Apparently, this is part of a "Primary Criteria" tool kit the NCAA Committee uses. KPI is new to the kit this year. It factors in Home/Away (which RPI does not do) and set results. That is, 3-0, 3-1, and 3-2. RPI only uses W/L. I don't think it replaces RPI; it is an addition. No one seems to know exactly how KPI is calculated. This is already more than I know, but one poster notes that ...

Interestingly, KPI's biggest changes from RPI are in the benefit of mid-major teams, and at the expense of P5 teams. Coincidence? We'll have to see more data. From the top 64 RPI teams, here is what I see:

KPI *likes* these teams:
Hawaii: KPI + 21
Western Michigan: KPI + 15
UCLA: KPI +14
Wichita State: KPI +14


The +14 means the Shocks are fourteen spots higher in KPI as compared to RPI? Yes, it does. The RPI slot for the Shockers is 55 per figstats. The KPI slot is 41. At the moment, I don't think I could tolerate the brain freeze that would result from trying to explore KPI any further, but for those with a stronger constitution ...

KPI: faktorsports.com/

Ok, the RPI/KPI for SMU is 32/34, and for Rice is 41/36.

As I understand it, RPI is used as the primary tool for choosing at large teams, unless and until a P5 conference team appears to be undervalued. At that point they will begin to factor in the positive additions of the KPI to bolster the curious P5 team. This also works the other way, so that if a non P5 team is unusually bolstered by the RPI then the KPI can be factored in if, and only if, the new metric lowers the team in question to a ranking spot more justifiable given it's non P5 status. If the KPI strengthens the team then the metric must be thrown out, and the entire positioning refigured, most notably at this point by individual input behind closed doors, to prevent tampering.

I hope that clears it up.