.png)
Points Per Set
Update and Warning!!!
In doing a follow-up article, I realized that I had an error in the blocks calculations starting with teams following NYU. Basically, teams would be assigned the number of blocks obtained by the next team in alphabetical order! So…gaaag.
Please be kind and I’ll leave this up as a monument to my failure but I also believe points/set is very useful.
Some notable corrections – 7 of the Elite 8 had excellent Points/Set. We now have to add in St. Ben (17.2821) and Trinity (17.5596). Honestly, Trinity should have flagged my work in error. UTD, Susquehanna, Transylvania and Otterbein all see increases to their already impressive numbers. Stevenson and St. Thomas (16.6535) both dropped. In addition to St. Ben and Trinity, other schools above 16.75 P/S were St. Olaf (16.9634), Tufts (17.4663) and Wesleyan (16.868).
You have my apology.
I talk a lot about the importance of hitting percentage (or efficiency) when it comes to competing for the NCAA DIII championship. Simply put your team needs to be within the Top 11 to have a chance based on history. Another important statistic, which I look at when I consider statistics lost to graduation, is points or points per set. Oddly, although the NCAA Statistics Database will give us points and points/set for individuals, it doesn’t give us team totals. In this time of pandemic I thought it would be a good change of pace to look at statistics loss from 2018 and see how those teams did in 2019 now that everything has been set in stone. I wanted to not only take my mind off schools canceling the fall season but to see how important points/set was and see what teams were able to overcome their graduation statistics losses.
The first thing I did was pull the components of what goes into points (kills, aces and blocks) from the database (which the database does have) and calculate the total points for each team. I then factored in the sets played to give me points/set. I then went back and pulled the statistics lost to graduation from 2018 and to my dismay the names don’t always match up, which meant I needed to figure out a nifty Excel formula or do more manual labor. After failing on the first, I chose the second method (or, more correctly, it chose me).
The first thing that jumped out at me was that it took about 26 places in points/set before we started to see teams that didn’t make the NCAA Tournament. Out of those 26 teams, only 2 failed to make it. So, right off the bat, points/set is important. Not too surprising since you have to be able to create your points to have success at the highest levels. Still, I expected to see some teams out of the northeast that feasted on lesser teams and that really wasn’t the case. What I got for the most part were the big volleyball programs. Here is the list:
Team | Sets | Kills | Blocks | Aces | Points | P/S | |
1 | Colorado Col. (SCAC) | 122 | 1772 | 212 | 243 | 2227 | 18.2541 |
2 | Johns Hopkins (Centennial) | 113 | 1580 | 198.5 | 282 | 2060.5 | 18.2345 |
3 | Calvin (Michigan Intercol. Ath. Assn.) | 100 | 1375 | 214 | 233 | 1822 | 18.2200 |
4 | Claremont-M-S (SCIAC) | 112 | 1544 | 255 | 195 | 1994 | 17.8036 |
5 | Chicago (UAA) | 111 | 1524 | 216.5 | 223 | 1963.5 | 17.6892 |
6 | Otterbein (OAC) | 117 | 1643 | 147 | 249 | 2039 | 17.4274 |
7 | Texas-Dallas (ASC) | 100 | 1410 | 141.5 | 191 | 1742.5 | 17.4250 |
8 | Juniata (Landmark) | 115 | 1487 | 283 | 233 | 2003 | 17.4174 |
9 | Chris. Newport (CAC) | 127 | 1603 | 242.5 | 350 | 2195.5 | 17.2874 |
10 | Stevenson (MAC Commonwealth) | 113 | 1475 | 233.5 | 242 | 1950.5 | 17.2611 |
11 | Babson (NEWMAC) | 118 | 1550 | 173.5 | 312 | 2035.5 | 17.2500 |
12 | Carthage (CCIW) | 121 | 1599 | 253.5 | 232 | 2084.5 | 17.2273 |
13 | MIT (NEWMAC) | 112 | 1449 | 212 | 262 | 1923 | 17.1696 |
14 | Hope (Michigan Intercol. Ath. Assn.) | 116 | 1537 | 222 | 228 | 1987 | 17.1293 |
15 | JWU (Providence) (Great Northeast) | 115 | 1511 | 203 | 251 | 1965 | 17.0870 |
16 | Susquehanna (Landmark) | 132 | 1778 | 205.5 | 263 | 2246.5 | 17.0189 |
17 | St. Thomas (MN) (MIAC) | 127 | 1768 | 228.5 | 164 | 2160.5 | 17.0118 |
18 | Emory (UAA) | 135 | 1838 | 222 | 227 | 2287 | 16.9407 |
19 | Bowdoin (NESCAC) | 105 | 1370 | 205.5 | 199 | 1774.5 | 16.9000 |
20 | Ithaca (Liberty League) | 116 | 1589 | 195 | 176 | 1960 | 16.8966 |
21 | Muskingum (OAC) | 111 | 1524 | 187.5 | 161 | 1872.5 | 16.8694 |
22 | Northwestern-St. Paul (UMAC) | 121 | 1620 | 200 | 220 | 2040 | 16.8595 |
23 | Transylvania (HCAC) | 114 | 1592 | 168 | 158 | 1918 | 16.8246 |
24 | Greenville (SLIAC) | 114 | 1479 | 188.5 | 248 | 1915.5 | 16.8026 |
25 | Maryville (TN) (USA South) | 115 | 1471 | 156 | 301 | 1928 | 16.7652 |
26 | Berry (SAA) | 120 | 1531 | 245.5 | 234 | 2010.5 | 16.7542 |
One note is to remember that for points, blocks as counted as one point for a solo and ½ point for an assist. The number above does the calculation for you.
The list includes 5 of the Elite 8 from last year; no Clarkson (53rd), St. Ben (75th) and Trinity (104th). It also includes MIT (24-7) and Greenville (22-9) who were the two teams not to make the NCAA Tournament. MIT was the next team under consideration out of the New England Region while SLIAC favorite Greenville was upset in the first round of their conference tournament. After Berry, we still see really good teams but the majority didn’t qualify for the NCAA Tournament.
So, again, points/set is really important looking at only one year’s worth of data. As I mentioned at the top, I’ve favored hitting percentage but that really feeds into the kills component of points, which is the largest part of the calculation. I suspect points/set is just as important if not more important if I looked back over the last 10 years.
Gauging the relationship between statistics loss and points/set is a bit tougher. Here is the same list with points/set and their 2018 points loss percentage:
Team | P/S | PTs Loss | |
1 | Colorado Col. (SCAC) | 18.2541 | 21.93 |
2 | Johns Hopkins (Centennial) | 18.2345 | 18.13 |
3 | Calvin (Michigan Intercol. Ath. Assn.) | 18.2200 | 18.13 |
4 | Claremont-M-S (SCIAC) | 17.8036 | 0 |
5 | Chicago (UAA) | 17.6892 | 30.76 |
6 | Otterbein (OAC) | 17.4274 | 50.23 |
7 | Texas-Dallas (ASC) | 17.4250 | 15 |
8 | Juniata (Landmark) | 17.4174 | 20.51 |
9 | Chris. Newport (CAC) | 17.2874 | 9.39 |
10 | Stevenson (MAC Commonwealth) | 17.2611 | 29.16 |
11 | Babson (NEWMAC) | 17.2500 | 23.24 |
12 | Carthage (CCIW) | 17.2273 | 7.33 |
13 | MIT (NEWMAC) | 17.1696 | 44.33 |
14 | Hope (Michigan Intercol. Ath. Assn.) | 17.1293 | 41.55 |
15 | JWU (Providence) (Great Northeast) | 17.0870 | 1.59 |
16 | Susquehanna (Landmark) | 17.0189 | 2.03 |
17 | St. Thomas (MN) (MIAC) | 17.0118 | 54.86 |
18 | Emory (UAA) | 16.9407 | 46.67 |
19 | Bowdoin (NESCAC) | 16.9000 | 16.99 |
20 | Ithaca (Liberty League) | 16.8966 | 29.24 |
21 | Muskingum (OAC) | 16.8694 | 11.11 |
22 | Northwestern-St. Paul (UMAC) | 16.8595 | 34.82 |
23 | Transylvania (HCAC) | 16.8246 | 21.28 |
24 | Greenville (SLIAC) | 16.8026 | 3.18 |
25 | Maryville (TN) (USA South) | 16.7652 | 3.96 |
26 | Berry (SAA) | 16.7542 | 34.73 |
I often look at a threshold of 45% for points loss and in this list we can see that three teams exceeded that in 2018 but still had excellent offenses in 2019. Otterbein is maybe my surprise team here. They are a really good program but that was still a lot to overcome. Emory and St. Thomas were the other two but neither really concerns me as they both seem to be able to overcome losses in the past. Bottom line, these two programs typically have sophomores and juniors ready to step into starting roles. Other than these three teams, no one else was above the 45% threshold. It should be noted that these statistics losses were from seniors and doesn’t include everyone that left the team between 2018 and 2019 so that always throws a wrench into things.
Looking at the flip side is even tougher. What I decided to do was look at the final 2018 Pablo Rankings and find the teams that finished in the top 100 that had statistics losses over 45%. We had IWU (losses of 71.41% and a 2019 points/set total of 13.83), Gustavus Adolphus (59.7%, 16.27 P/S), Lewis & Clark (57.9%, 14.29 P/S), Pacific Lutheran (56.47%, 13.67 P/S), Washington-St. Louis (51.72%, 15.14 P/S), Marymount (49.64%, 16.05 P/S), Carnegie Mellon (49.29%, 15.8 P/S), Bethel (47.24%, 16.59 P/S), Whitworth (47.02%, 14.99 P/S), Middlebury (46.99%, 14.95 P/S), Wis. – Oshkosh (46.69%, 14.91 P/S) and Williams (46.19%, 14.21 P/S). Obviously, Otterbein, Emory and St. Thomas were also on this list but were covered above. So, a real mixed bag here but also a sign that overcoming statistics loss isn’t as tough as I thought it had been. I mean IWU did really struggle last season after a great 2018 season, but other teams had more success. All in all, it’s obviously better to have your players returning and it certainly does help with having a better year. On the flip side if your squad is deep or recruits well than the impact is muted a bit.
If the NCAA is listening then please consider adding team points and team points/set to the database. It’s a little strange you do this for the players but not the teams. Maybe I’ll get some energy and do that myself and see if can add a little history to the statistic. It will mean I have to cut back on my World of Tanks playing so I can’t make any promises.
Personal note – My wife got tested for Covid-19 on Thursday and it came back negative. She still has about 4 days to ensure that symptoms don’t appear but it was a nice to get that reassurance. Your mind starts playing tricks on you and little things you don’t normally think twice about become positive signs you have the virus.
Comments