Hi, volleyball fans, and welcome back to Volley
Talk, the podcast created for volleyball lovers
who want to dig deep into what is going on in
NCAA and international volleyball. I'm your host,
Sarah Pavan. I'm an Olympian, beach volleyball
world champion, former Nebraska Cornhusker, and
longtime pro, both indoor and on the beach. And
I'm Adam Schultz, former indoor player, international
volleyball coach, and the show's resident stat
guy. We are back with some more educational content
this week. And the only hint I will give you
is that Adam is very excited. And if you are
one of our American listeners, Thanksgiving is
upon us. So with that comes the end of conference
play and selection show Sunday for the NCAA tournament,
which is very exciting stuff. Some conferences
have already been clinched. So we have a handful
of teams that already are guaranteed births in
the tournament. But with the selection show comes
All -American time. So, of course, we have to
throw out our predictions for that as well. So
we are very excited to speculate and chit -chat
volleyball with all of you. So let's get started.
Not much to report from a rankings perspective
from the last week. The major shifts we saw were
TCU dropping to 20 from 16. We have already talked
about their plummet off the cliff here from midseason
on. It's been rough. It hasn't gotten any better.
Not going well. And Iowa State climbed to 22
from 25. The rest stayed pretty solid. Yeah,
I mean, I don't think we're going to see. Much
change from now until the end of the season.
We have the upcoming ranking that is released
when this episode is coming out. And then it's
selection time. So basically the rankings are
what they are. Teams that are on the bubble are
fighting for their RPI ranking. So if you're
on the bubble, win in three. You know what I
mean? But as far as the Power Four conferences
at the time of this recording, Nebraska has clinched
the Big Ten title. Arizona State has clinched
the Big 12. And everybody else is battling for
second in the Big 12. Literally every other team.
Like the whole conference. Wild. Absolutely wild.
So that's great. The unexpected results from
the week, there weren't many. But talking about
battling for second place in the Big 12. So Colorado
lost three straight to Cincinnati. Whoops. Not
ideal. Big 12, Kansas got absolutely slapped
three straight by both Utah and BYU. We watched
the BYU game. And it's crazy. BYU is a tale of
two cities for me. You watch their athletes.
They're very physical. They played really well
against Kansas, I thought. You watch that team
and go, how is your record what it is? Like those
two things don't line up. Well, after beating
Kansas, they're 8 -8 in the Big 12. That's absolutely
wild. And I just don't think it should happen.
I think they should be way better than they are.
The consistency is definitely an issue. The eye
test from that game, and now we have watched
a couple games where they've been awful, but
the eye test from that game to their ranking
just don't line up. Very similar, I feel the
same way about Oregon, where watching them play,
the eye test doesn't line up with the rankings.
Agreed. I can't believe that's their record,
and I can't believe Kansas lost 3 -0 to both
Utah and BYU. Oh, no. As we've talked, so inconsistent
all year. The whole conference is inconsistent,
except Arizona State, it seems. We've actually
gotten a question recently about Coach Olmsted
at BYU. This person was like, she frequently
coaches the U21 national teams, the collegiate
national teams. She has won coach of the year.
But this person said she makes coaching decisions
that I think hurt BYU. In the last several years,
BYU's team hasn't been as good as they historically
were. For example, she doesn't set up pre -conference
schedule that pushes her team. It's majority
gimme teams that pad her stats. What are your
takes on Coach Olmsted's coaching, what she does
well, what she struggles with, where she falls
short? What do they need to do as a program to
get back to the top 10 -5 form and go for it
in the tournament? I don't know her well enough
and I haven't watched. I mean, I've watched several
BYU games. I don't know if I've watched enough
BYU to speak to her coaching style or what she's
doing well or not. Consistency is definitely
a problem. Yes, I agree with you. And there's
two things when it comes to consistency. You
can't lay it all at the coach's feet. However,
it seems to me that they lose to teams that they
have no business losing to. That's either. Just
an inability for athletes to get into the mindset
to compete on a daily basis or and or it's they're
not necessarily mutually exclusive, but the preparation
is different from match to match in terms of
the expectations and what you should do. And
that is definitely part of the coaching staff.
Now, again, we're not in the gym. We can't say
that, but that is a relatively common occurrence
when you see situations like this that happen
because their athletes are not all super young.
It's a consistent program. In my opinion, they
should be better than their record indicates.
Obviously, BYU is predominantly LDS. I don't
know what percentage of students or student athletes,
rather, at BYU are not LDS. affiliated. So I
feel like if the student athlete population there,
and I know a large majority of them are, but
that's also like from a recruiting standpoint,
I think they're missing a good right side. They
have a strong middle in chem of war, but they're
missing a second middle piece, I think. And then
they've got like one and a half good left sides,
Claire little, she shows up huge sometimes and
then just completely disappears other times.
I think Bauer, their setter, has gotten better
since last year. I didn't really like her last
year, but she's gotten a lot better. And their
pickup with Suli Davis is massive. She's very,
very good. So good. But I guess the point I'm
making is if you're recruiting from a certain
pool of people, how much does that limit you?
It definitely limits you from year to year. Sometimes
you'll get a really good crop of athletes. Sometimes
you won't. I think for me, Looking at the athletes
she does have on this roster, I think they're
underperforming. That would be my criticism.
No, but the question being, what do they need
to do to get back to the top 10? Well, yeah.
You've got to have good crops of athletes that
come in and can play for you. You're somewhat
limited in that regard, but I don't think they're
getting the potential out of the team they currently
have. I also don't see BYU... implement a lot
of changes or strategy it seems like it's more
of a we're just gonna hit the ball really really
hard and sometimes it's gonna work and sometimes
it's not like I don't I can't always tell what
the game plan is I can't always tell what the
serving strategy is I don't always see and again
I haven't watched all the games so this criticism
may or may not be fair but don't always see substitutions
in terms of when you know players are struggling
take them off the floor talk to them put them
back in You know, I definitely think there are
probably some things that could be done to get
more out of this team than we saw this season.
Moving away from the Big 12, yes, there were
only two results that we have this week from
there. North Carolina got beaten by both Florida
State and Miami. We watched the Miami game, and
that was ugly. I expected that to be way closer.
It was a 14 -15 matchup at the time. Wow. I mean,
they got blasted in the first set. Not good.
They played better in the second and third, but
they didn't capitalize on any of their chances.
I didn't think. They couldn't pass. They couldn't
pass. They didn't serve particularly well. No.
They were good in flashes, but that's not the
North Carolina team that was ranked 15th. Yeah,
ranked 15th. Like, come on, guys. And then to
lose to Florida State, too, earlier in the week.
Sure. That can't happen. You can't. lose both
of those matches. I mean, I was getting into
tournament time. Are you kidding? Yeah. I was
expecting the Miami game to be really, really
good. Like I was looking forward to watching
that one and they just did not show up in my
opinion. Yeah. Well, another game that we expected
a lot from that did not deliver was Wisconsin
versus Purdue. Okay. Let's spend a little time
here. Wisconsin crushed Purdue three straight.
Yes. Wisconsin looked really good. I really liked
watching Charlie for ringer. play in that match.
I thought she was very good. She stayed aggressive
at the net regardless of the shoulder injury
that she's coming back from which I think for
me is a good show of where her head is at. Well
especially because we heard that she was done
for the whole season. Yeah. So that was good
to see but first and foremost I thought she set
a really good game. I liked her out of system
setting that game. Her out of system setting
to the left side specifically was in tempo. It
looked really good. I actually thought their
outside struggled for the most part, but she
ran the middle incredibly well. I think the middles
had 29 kills between the two of them. It was
really good to see her get both of those middles
going. I really liked her distribution. I thought
she made good decisions. She got one -on -ones.
I thought their game plan against Waller to shut
her down was really effective. Waller hit zero
on the match. She was seven kills, seven errors
on 24 swings. That's just not going to cut it
when you're fighting for second in the Big Ten.
I actually thought Ferbringer was their best
player. I thought Mimi struggled at the beginning,
but then kind of found her way afterwards. She
was better in the second and third set, but Ferbringer
in the middle, so that was the story for me.
Do you think it was Wisconsin was so good, or
do you think Purdue was also bad? I think it
was a little bit of... Both, but more Wisconsin
was better. Again, we've talked about this. Purdue
is a team that's probably not going to make a
ton of errors. They're going to serve aggressively.
They're well coached. Their setter, Taylor Anderson,
was pretty bad, I thought. She struggled, and
I think that threw everybody else off. And the
libero setting. I'm on a setting kick today,
so buckle up. There were some just unhittable
balls. From this libero setting, okay? I'm sorry,
when you are setting the left side, they should
not be hitting from position three. The bad setting
is magnified when you're playing against a team
that has a block the way that Wisconsin does.
No, I'm talking like you're missing that set
by five meters. Well, yes, I understand. And
their actual setter. Had a couple head scratchers
as well. I saw a girl jump and miss the ball.
I think that was the biggest issue. I don't think
they passed particularly well either. But the
setting was definitely kind of the focal issue
that I saw, both from the setter and from the
other players. We got a question about Wisconsin
that I think is interesting. This person said,
what does Wisconsin need to do to make a push
in the tournament? Because it seems like Mimi
is like the only person they set. Would it make
sense, perhaps, for Grace Egan to move to the
left side and bring Wardlow or Quest in on the
right side? The season was a tale of two situations
for me for Wisconsin. Not two cities this time,
two situations. When Furbringer's in, she runs
a way more balanced offense than their backup
setter. So when the backup setter's in, she's
set Mimi because that's the safety blanket. That's
what you're comfortable with. So I don't think
that that's going to be an issue going into the
tournament. I think that if Furbringer's healthy
and they're passing relatively well, she will
distribute the ball in a way that is effective.
But how do you feel about this Vajic girl? Not
a huge fan. Yeah, so would Egan be a better option
than her on the left side and then bring Quest
or somebody in on the right? Because I am not
a huge Vajic fan either. Sheffield needs to be
comfortable. messing with his lineup. Well, we
all, we know he's not. Well, but this, you asked
me what he has to do. He has to be okay. Putting
those outside hitters and rotating who's playing
where. Let's say he wasn't scared of changing
his lineup or let's say he was open to making
changes or substitutions. What do you think that
that arrangement would be better than keeping
by addition on the left side? Probably you can
pass. Well, that's the thing. It's going to come
down to which outside can pass the best. You
need passers for Wisconsin to be able to run
the middle. First and foremost, for them to be
successful, their middles have to be a threat
consistently. That's number one for me. And so
if that means you've got a rotating outside core
outside of Mimi Collier for who's going to pass,
so be it. And you might have to throw, not throw
away, but if you play set one and it's a dumpster
fire, then you make changes right then and there.
We know that's not going to happen. Well, going
in, that's what you have to be prepared for because...
There is a little bit of a lack of consistency
with Vajicic on the left side there. If Egan's
your next best option, then you put her there
and you put in your other players on right side.
I think that that totally has to be something
that's on the table. Because when they're playing
well and they're clicking, they're good. But
there is that inconsistency in that regard. And
they're going to face very good serving teams.
Okay, there's one more Wisconsin question I wanted
to address now. And it is, what is your opinion
on the two setters? Some people say that Addie
Horner's ceiling is higher than Charlie Furbringer's.
Do you think she could ever overtake Charlie?
My instinct on this answer is we have seen how
reluctant Sheffield is to make changes. He is
not the type that would bench Charlie Furbringer
to take a flyer on this other girl, even if hypothetically.
Horner does surpass Furbringer. I think Furbringer's
got that starting spot for her whole time there.
I'm actually a big Charlie Furbringer fan. She
does a lot of things really well. First and foremost,
I really like her decision making and how she
runs her offense. Definitely from the few matches
that I saw Addie play, I don't think they're
on the same level. She's bigger. But Charlie
blocks pretty well. You don't generally see her
being abused in the front row. And I think that...
She's a really cerebral setter. And that's hard
to overtake, especially at that age, I think.
We're basing that off of anything that we know.
No, just watching her decision -making when she
sets the ball and who she chooses to set at different
times. For how young she is, I'm generally impressed
with her decision -making. So I would be surprised
if Addie overtook her. That's my take. Anything
else you thought about Purdue? Or from that match
before I have one more thing to wrap up this
segment. Give it to me. I happened to listen
to the post game. Okay, I thought you were going
to let this go. I'm not going to let it go. I
happened to listen to the post game interview
with Coach Sheffield after that win. And he seemed
genuinely shocked that Dave Shondell changed
his rotation to start in rotation one, which
apparently he's never done all year. And that
was the reason that they got off to a slow start.
First of all, there's a few things that I find
incredibly concerning about this statement. One,
changing your starting rotation to get a matchup
against teams should be a fundamental practice
for volleyball at all levels, including club
volleyball. For that to be a surprise or to be
like a shocking strategy that you would see at
the highest level in the Big Ten is head -scratching
to me. Now, I don't know if he was just trying
to give him credit. And we don't watch teams
like enough to see rotation changes from match
to match. But that's volleyball 101 in my mind.
I was shocked. I don't know how you feel about
that. I mean, if you're the top dog in a matchup,
I would say you just start where you start. And
the other team should make adjustments. If Shondell
is the under, and it was such a close matchup
ranking wise, like was there an underdog in this
match? I don't know. But like hypothetically,
let's say Purdue was, you're going to see where
Wisconsin normally starts and you're going to
set your rotation for the lineup you want. Absolutely.
I just thought it was funny that he was surprised
that that happened. Maybe he was looking for
something to be complimentary about. And he might
have been because they beat them so badly and
whatever else. But that comment just stood out
to me as a bit of a head scratcher. What else
happened in this week? No, that's it. Those are
the noteworthy results for the week. But on Monday
at noon Eastern, so by the time this podcast
has been released, this has probably already
happened. The MLV draft is happening. On the
Roku channel. If we missed it. Maybe they'll
show it on YouTube. Who knows. But Dallas gets
the first pick. Because they're new to the league.
Fair enough. So it'll be interesting to see.
Which graduating athletes. Are choosing to go
the MLV route. Last year. We know that MLV. PVF
at the time. drafted some athletes that really
had no intention of ever playing MLV or PVF.
Curious to see if that'll happen again. That
whole wrinkle adds a lot of intrigue to the draft,
which I think will be interesting. Who knows?
Who knows? So maybe they've done better research
or connected with athletes and coaches beforehand
to see who is actually committed to playing for
the league. We'll find out. But recently, Love
and MLV both announced new expansion teams. So
both are going to head to Minnesota, I think,
in 2027. And then Love is heading to LA. And
then I have heard that MLV is heading to Northern
California. I'm pretty sure the LA team is happening
in 2020. Okay. The season starts in 2027. Minnesota
is starting in 2027 for MLV. I'm just like, my
question is, why are you guys going to the exact
same places all the time? Well, just trying to
hit the volleyball markets and capture them.
Thank you, Adam. Find different ones. You're
making people pick the same, a similar product
in the same city. Both believe that they will
be the one who's successful and want to have
a presence. That's what I'm guessing is happening.
But just the fact that they're all going to the
same places. I understand you're picking places
where volleyball is big, but can we not do it
at the same time? We'll see who wins. It's going
to continue to be a fight. So that's happening.
I've also heard that the Love Six will probably
not be a thing. No, I'm guessing that was a one
-time deal. But because Kelsey Cook and Justine
Wong -Arantes announced their pregnancies, that
leaves a couple of vacancies that I think will
have expected to be filled. So I have heard,
and I'm not positive about this, that very short
contracts were offered to a couple graduating
athletes. Would you take those really short contracts
or go to MLV? Depends what you think your future
is going to be and the money around it. and the
sponsorship opportunities, it's a tough decision
unless you know all of the specifics. Yeah, again,
I've heard a lot of rumors. We aren't confirmed
on those, so I don't want to go wild with these
speculations. But I just wanted to throw them
out there, you know? We will have a breakdown
on the draft next week, though. We'll take a
look and let you guys know what we think. It's
been a big week, you guys. Beach Volleyball World
Championships finished up. Latvia won the women's
side. Sweden won the men's side. We had a Sweden
-Sweden final in the men's side. Which was a
massive shocker. Schmassive. And, I mean, Latvia's
been knocking at the door for a while now. Yeah,
good for them. Yeah. I played an AVP with Tina,
so. Of note, it looks like Duda and Anna Patricia,
there was some sort of injury. They dropped out
in the round of 16. They didn't even play that
match. They're always in the conversation to
win. So this tournament seems like it was wide
open. Finally, I can't tell you the number of
messages that we received about this on Instagram
this week. Izzy Stark has announced that she
is entering the transfer portal, which probably
comes as a shock to nobody. But now the question
is, where is she going? Originally, Adam and
I were all over the Texas train, but then I started
thinking about what happened to Avery Carlson
and how the Swindle fans just really pushed her
out. Would the coaching staff recruit over Swindle
again, or would somebody go to a program where
that has happened? So that's got me scratching
my head. Where else do you think she could possibly
land, though? So there's two things for me. One,
it depends how Texas does at the tournament and
who's. quote -unquote fault it is if it doesn't
go well. Okay, but there were like all SEC selection
posts made about the Texas players that got to
go. Shout out to the person who sent me the screenshot.
And the first comment was, where's Ella Swindle?
She is the engine that keeps the Texas program
running. Well, she didn't make it because that's
just not true. Because the people who picked
it, they know. That's why. I'm sticking with,
I think, that's the weak link. I still think
that's the front runner for a couple reasons.
One, they can probably throw a good amount of
money at her. I'm sure there's a bidding war
going on behind the scenes with her agent. They're
about to throw a ton of money at her. Yeah, so
we'll see what happens there. But also, where
else can you step in with those horses? Here's
the thing. There's a lot of top programs that
have young setters at the helm. Correct. Not
Kentucky. Cassie O 'Brien is a freshman. Yeah.
Bergen -Riley still has a year, and then Campbell
Flynn is going to step in. Probably not Nebraska.
Stanford has Logan Parks. And you don't just
walk into Stanford. You need to have the academic
clout to back that up. I don't know about her
academic history or anything, but I'm just saying.
Pitt could be an option. Could be, but when Babcock
leaves, what are you tying your wagon to? Okay,
fine. Wisconsin has Furbringer. They're the same
age. Is she going to lose her eligibility a year?
Absolutely. I would be shocked if they get it
back. I heard Alexis Stuckey might leave Florida.
So Florida could be an option. I wouldn't be
shocked if Stuckey went to Penn State. Wouldn't
that be nuts? We're going to throw rumors out.
We could talk about this forever. My gut is...
Stark ends up at Texas. And if Stucky goes to
Penn State, I think Heredia Colon would follow
her. Again, I'm basing this on absolutely nothing
other than... Heredia Colon already tried to
go play with Martin and Stucky. Exactly. We'll
have to wait and see on that one, but I wouldn't
be surprised. SMU, perhaps? We know SMU loves
the portal. True. Arizona State? SMU could be
an option. I think it's hard to go. Playing at
Penn State, it's a prestigious program. I think
that that matters. Wow, Adam's getting all elitist.
I'm just saying. I didn't expect it from him.
I'm just saying. If you are looking at places
to go, I think Texas makes the most sense where
you can come in and go, hey, they've got a bunch
of really good young players there. Oh, well,
if I'm Izzy Stark, do I care about... Ella Swindle's
spot. No, I'm going to go try to win the spot.
The question is, if you know that the Texas fans
are diehard Swindle, do you want to deal with
that? Especially when your reason for leaving
Penn State was mental health issues, because
that can cause some mental health issues if you're
getting bullied about playing. We'll see. I still
think that that makes the most sense if she's
leaving. Let us know your thoughts. Let us know
where you think she'll end up. I think Texas
makes the most sense, but there are options.
Okay, so we are going to continue on the theme
of Volleyball Education 101, 102. I love these,
really. We had somebody reach out and ask about
stats. You know, what do we look at? What do
they mean? So we're going to dive in. We'll cover
some of the basic ones you see on the broadcasts.
And then we'll go into a little bit more of a
conversation about what maybe teams are looking
at in terms of preparation. The stats we actually
think are important when it comes to winning
games. This is definitely your wheelhouse because
you have been the stats guy for a lot of top
teams. That is true. So this is definitely your
wheelhouse. Yeah. I enjoy combining the stats
with the eye test. I think you can't do either
of those on their own. I think there's always
gaps. So marrying the two and coming up with
the... Good observation and a good conclusion.
I really enjoy doing that. Okay, so whenever
we dive into personal stuff, it's usually about
me. But why don't you give our listeners a CV,
resume, summary? I hate doing this, but I guess...
Well, you have to. Fair is fair. I started learning
stats in Italy when we moved there from the stats
guy who did... Sarah's professional team. So
I learned data volley to start. I did that with
the Canadian national team as their statistician
for four years, five years. I don't know. It
was a while. You kept doing it after I stopped
with them, didn't you? Yeah, I did. So I would
do data volley for the Canadian national team.
We would stat practices. We would stat tryouts.
We would stat tournaments. I was doing game plans.
I also worked as the statistician slash assistant
coach for a professional team in Brazil. The
one where I was working with Bruno and some of
the other national teams. So that was probably
one of the coolest volleyball experiences I've
ever had. And then when I started coaching beach,
there was no good data volley on the beach side.
So with my computer science background, I wrote
my own stats program that we used for a decade
competing at world championships, Olympics, so
on and so forth. So I love the numbers. I've
been doing it for a long time. So here we go.
Amazing. Let's talk about the basic stats you
see on some of the broadcasts. We'll start with
the really easy ones. Assists. You touch the
ball. You set it to somebody on your team. They
get a kill off that swing. You get an assist.
Easy peasy. Aces. This one actually has a little
bit of gray area that people may not know. Go
ahead. Why don't you take this one? So an ace
is either like you serve the ball and it directly
hits the ground or you serve the ball. Somebody
passes it and they can't get. a solid second
contact to be able to put it back over. Both
of those are considered aces. Very important
because I'm not sure everybody always knows that.
Digs, if you touch the ball up on your side,
and this one's a little nuanced as well, if the
ball doesn't hit the block and you get a dig
in the middle of the court and your team can
get a second touch on it, it counts as a dig.
They also count digging a ball off a block touch.
as a dig in a lot of places. So I think in some
places they also, if a free ball comes over and
you pass it, they count that as a dig as well.
Correct. Those dig stats can actually be a little
inflated with free balls and touches off the
block that are easy. And then specifically in
the college game, and I'm not sure they do this
anywhere else in the world, but there's a block
solo and a block assist. If you block somebody
one -on -one, And let's go back. A block counts
when you block the ball straight to the floor
and you get that point right then and there.
It also counts if somebody covers it, but it
shoots off to the side. That also counts similar
to the ace. If you're the only person involved
in the block, you get a block solo. If there's
a double block or a triple block, everybody who
participates in that block, if it's a kill block,
gets a block assist. Which is half. Sometimes
you see a half block on the stats. That's how...
that number comes to be because half blocks are
kind of funny that way. And that is like internationally
and at the professional level overseas, the people
keeping the stats watch who actually makes contact
with the ball when they're blocking and they
give it to that person. Yeah. So those ones are
often wrong actually. Correct. Because it happens
so fast. Yes. So those are the basic ones. And
then we have hitting percentage. He needed to
say that extra slow. well because there's kill
percentage and there's hitting percentage so
we're going to go over both of those hitting
percentage has to do with how efficient you are
as an attacker and it brings in the number of
errors you make so the formula for that is you
take your number of kills you minus the number
of errors you've made and you divide that by
your total number of attempts that gives you
your hitting percentage this is different from
your kill percentage which is the number of kills
you get over the number of attacks you have.
So one is looking at just how often you kill
the ball. And the other one is how many mistakes
are you making? How efficient you are? Which
of those two stats do you like better? Or do
you think means more? Hitting percentage. Fair
enough. Because you can kill 50 % of your swings,
but then make errors on the other 50%. And so
you're a net zero for your team. Even though
you're swinging, like your kill percentage is
pretty high. If you're causing as much hurt to
your team as points, it's not great. Those individual
stats can then also be applied to a team situation.
So you'll see your team hitting percentage, which
is everybody's attacks minus the team's errors
over everybody's attempts. And you can do the
kill percentage for the same thing. Those stats
can be either player specific or team specific.
I think that's pretty much... I also want to
add like in the NCAA, they include if you hit
out or in the net or if you get blocked as an
error. Correct. But some places don't count getting
blocked as an error because they want, we're
making this more complicated, but some stats
groups want the points to be separate from the
errors. So if you're assigning a point for a
block and an error for a block, it doesn't add
up. Right. There are differences in like leagues
and stuff and how they choose to do that. But
in NCAA volleyball, they include getting blocked
as an error. What is your personal opinion about
that? I like including getting blocked as an
error. Me too. And I think that the person who
blocks should get credit for it too. Totally
agree. Because if you're a hitter that goes up
and just gets blocked over and over again, like
you're not doing much. And it should be reflected.
Yeah, 100%. Those are the basic stats you generally
see on a broadcast. some of the team specific
preparation stuff, I want to go over a few other
kind of individual player things that I've seen
done and that I've done myself that I find valuable.
And some of the things that I look at when I'm
evaluating players, when I've worked with teams,
we've done a player plus minus, where we grade
every contact that that player has made. For
example, if you look at attacking, and it's a
continue, so the other team gets the ball and
the rally continues. That's kind of a wash, right?
It goes to your total attempts, but it doesn't
affect anything in terms of how we look at that
player. What I like to do is have a continue
plus and a continue minus. So if you make a really
good swing and the opposing team only has, you
know, one or two options or they're out of system.
Or sends a free ball back. Or sends a free ball
back. That's a positive outcome for you and you
should get credit for that. The same is where
if you play it super safe and you put a little
roll shot in or opponents can run the middle
off your attack, that's an attack minus and that
counts against you. And so we're actually looking
at your effect on that play as it's happening.
You can do that in all kinds of areas of the
game. And sometimes when we talk about setters,
if it's a bad pass and you come in and you make
a really good set, that is a plus action for
you. You are improving the ball. And that's kind
of how we look at... that metric. We wouldn't
necessarily give you a plus for passing a free
ball well, because that's the expectation, but
you would get a minus if you don't pass a free
ball well. So we start to look at your impact
on the ball outside of terminal points, and that
gives you a really good indication of whether
you're bringing value to your team or whether
you're hurting your team outside of some of the
terminal scoring. Basically, if you want to do
stats properly or well, it's not for the faint
of heart, everybody. It takes meticulous observation
and note -taking. If you're a statistician, every
match that your team plays, you watch probably
at least twice to go through and do the stats
for your team, for the other team. It's a lot
of work. I think it's fair to say the NCAA teams
are probably not going into this level of detail.
I bet you if they have a dedicated stats person,
the top -level teams are. I would be shocked
if we're doing plus -minus touches on the ball.
I would be surprised. Anyway, that's something
I personally really like. No, I think it's necessary
if you want to do your job properly. Don't cut
corners. But I think at the highest levels, yes,
they're going into that detail. College, I would
be surprised if it's that meticulous. Fair enough.
But I think it's important to be that meticulous.
Let's talk about block touches. So middles get
screwed in stats in general. They work so hard
and very rarely get credit for it. So one of
the things I also like to look at is... How many
times you make the right read? Did you close
the block? And then positive touches for those
blockers. So can we get a transition opportunity?
And would go even as far to say, did you follow
the game plan? Did you do your job in terms of
lining that block up, taking away what the game
plan dictates you're supposed to take away in
that situation? And this comes back to watching
film and prepping athletes. We track a lot of...
kind of that stuff away from the ball to understand
decisions athletes are making and if they're
executing on those decisions as well. Block touches
and block lineups, very important to track and
to stat. And then finally, we get lots of questions
about this. Very often on the broadcast, the
only thing they look at with serving and passing
is aces and errors. Let me tell you, it's important,
but it's not that important. If you get zero
aces, but you keep your opponents out of system,
80 % of the time, you're winning the match. What
a lot of teams will do is they will assign four
points in total to a serve and a pass. And often
on the NCAA broadcasts, at least, or the ones
we listen to, the announcers only talk about
a three -point scale. Correct. Here's a little
bit of detail. You get an ace. You get four points
for that serve. The passer gets a zero. The pass
is then dictated by... the number of options
the setter has to comfortably set. So if you
pass a horrible ball and they can only set a
high ball outside, that's a one pass and the
server would get a three. That totals four points.
Now, if you pass, you know, maybe behind the
attack line, but it's got pretty good height
on it. You could run, you know, a pipe in a left
side or a left side and a right side. You have
two options to set comfortably. You would get
a two pass for your team and the servers would
get a two for their serve. So that's essentially
a wash serve. Now, if you as a team have all
three options, you can run the middle, you can
run the left side, run the pipe. It's kind of
in front of the attack line. It was considered
a good pass. You would get a three for that pass
and the server would get a one. And here is where
I think some teams don't do this, but we often
look at the tempo of the pass. So how long is
the contact from the passer's forearm to the
setter's hands in terms of trying to keep everybody
in tempo that we want as a team? If you manage
to do that as a passer, we would then give you
a four pass because we want to know how often
we're really clicking it in tempo. In this case,
we also give the server a one because it's not
an error, but that is how I've always done the
passing and the serving scale. Does your scale
change based on the quality of the setter? If
a setter is capable of running the middle, say,
from off the net, does that change the padding
that you give certain numbers? It's all predicated
on what the expectations are. So if we have decided
as a team that this is a four pass, that... Four
pass might be different for different setters
on different teams, but it generally doesn't
change once you've set it up. If you switch setters,
your passing numbers generally stay the same
because as a team, you're trying to accomplish
one specific thing. But like if you're scouting
a team, like let's say you have a very average
setter and then the next day you play a team
that has like an elite setter. Does how you're
grading their passers change? Because of the
setter's magic. Not generally for a one, two,
or a three pass. For the four pass, it will change.
Just because when I'm scouting another team,
I'm trying to understand what they're trying
to accomplish as an offense. Like, what's their
gold standard? And then you know how to take
them out of that. Yes, to a certain degree, but
like a one, two, and a three pass are all generally
pretty much the same. Okay, so those are some
of the individual advanced stats that... I personally
like to look at that I've seen a lot of high
quality teams use. And now let's get into maybe
some of the stats that teams would use to prepare
for an opponent. And you can speak to this. You've
played for some fantastic coaches. Bernardinho
is one of the most prepared coaches I've ever
seen when it comes to game planning. First, and
again, you can change the order depending on
what you like to do, but generally these steps
apply. So one is you look at all of the players'
tendencies from the other team in isolation.
So what I mean by that is you would see... The
attackers. The attackers. Yes, the attackers
on... And the servers. You would generally see
one page per athlete on the opposing team, okay?
And you would have a court drawn out and all
of their attacks that you've had for the relevant
amount of games drawn on that box in different
scenarios. And this is a little hard to visualize
verbally, but we're going to do our best. So
in one box, you would have the different scenarios
that player could hit, right? So if they're a
left side, you would have all of their left side
attacks on an in -system pass. You would have
all of their left side attacks in a separate
court drawn out. or they're out of system passes.
And you're showing lines from where they're contacting
the ball to where the ball lands on the court.
Correct. So you end up having this court with
all these lines over showing whether they like
to hit line or angle or... deep seam. And those
lines are also color coded with different endings
on them, depending on the result of that swing
and the type of swing. So you want to know, was
it hard driven? Was it a tip? Was it a roll shot?
Did it go off the block? All of that is coded
into a system where you can just look at that
player sheet and understand what their tendencies
are. And again, you're looking in isolation for
in system attacks, out of system attacks, transition
attacks. Back row, right side. So again, every
player has a sheet and you're looking at all
of these different scenarios so that you know
when you recognize that scenario on the court,
what their tendencies are. And you would also
include their serving angles in that sheet as
well. So every player gets a little bio of information
about their attacking habits that the team has
put together. Anything to add on that in terms
of what you've seen on those sheets? I know that
sums it up well. What would you do for the setter's
sheet? This is the next one. After you kind of
got a feel for the hitters, and I want to be
clear, we generally pair video with these sheets.
So you would look at the sheets, you would talk
about them, and then we would watch video on
those players to line that up. The next thing
and where it starts to get a little more complicated
is... As if it's not complicated already. You
guys are listening to this like, whoa. Maybe
I'll try and throw some visuals up on the YouTube
channel. The next thing you start to look at
is your rotational charts. So this is the full
team now, not just one player. Exactly. And we
break it down rotation by rotation. So let's
say the setter is in one. You would have the
court laid out. It would say rotation one. All
of the hitters would be on that sheet. And you
would start to see a breakdown of what the set
distribution is to those different players, right?
So I'm in rotation one. Let's say it's a four
pass. Here's where the setter likes to go. The
routes that the hitters are running. Totally.
All of that information. So again, good pass,
bad pass, transition, out of system. It sounds
very complicated, but when you gather enough
data, patterns emerge. Yes. And so it's easier.
That's why stats guys do all the heavy work,
break it down for us normal people, and then
play the percentages. And obviously people change.
things up every now and then but you play the
probabilities the one other thing i think is
really interesting about these rotational sheets
is as a stats guy we mark down what route the
middle runs and what everybody else does so i
want to know if the middle runs a 31 which is
a push away from the setter do they like to set
the middle do they like to run the left side
do they then like to go back to the right side
so you're thinking about where the middle is
what type of pass it is and then what the percentages
are that they're going to set that hitter, and
then you're remembering what those hitters' tendencies
are. These are what players are thinking about
in real time. Let me rephrase that. This is what
players should be thinking about in real time
as the play is developing. So there's a lot of
things to prepare for and to be ready for. So
your middle blockers who get no credit for any
stats, they are thinking so much on the defensive
end because as they see where their responsibility...
the other middle is going, they are like, okay,
the middle's going here. They want to run A,
then B, then C. What are my responsibilities?
What am I doing? And then the outsides, when
they see where the middle is going, they're like,
okay, if I need to be able to help here, if I
am one -on -one, this is the angle that I'm taking.
If my middle makes it to me, this is where I'm
setting up my block. The defense sees which patterns
the other team is running and is like, hey, this
is where they want to hit. This is my responsibility.
This isn't just like, let's go to Cabo and like
play volleyball with our friends and just keep
the ball in the air. Like it is so much more
complicated than I think people give it. The
average fan gives a credit for. Totally. And
this is why you start to see teams will make
specific serves at different times. So we talk
about Ella Swindle. If you look at. What she
sets when the ball comes from behind her, there
will be a distinct pattern there. That's why
everybody serves Texas to zone one. Correct.
It eliminates her middle when she does that.
You look at if I pass a left side to their inside
seam and then they have to go and attack, they
don't swing line. So I might serve her into that
seam after 20 and go, hey, we're going to block
angle on this ball because we know what's going
to happen. Or, hey, if we serve a really easy
ball. to this team. They run the middle 85 %
of the time. We're going to purposely put in
an easy ball and then we're going to commit on
the middle. These are all the types of scenarios
that the stats guys are whispering in the coach's
ear about, hey, we can do this or we can do this
or look for this play in this situation. And
you start to see teams, good teams, do these
and play the percentages to score defensive points.
And internationally, that's why you see the head
coaches with mics in their ears, because the
stats guys for their teams are taking stats live
while they're playing and gathering data in case
it's in conflict with what they've prepared for.
And this is where the chess game starts. So you've
done all of your prep work here, and that game
plan is sitting beside you. And then as the match
is happening, you're looking for discrepancies
to your game plan. to see what your opponent
is trying to do so you can get one step ahead
of them it's so much fun to try and predict what's
going to happen to understand what your opponent
is doing and when it works and you get a block
as i'm telling you as a stats guy sitting at
the back of the court nothing feels better than
when you make a play call and it works and you're
just it's the greatest feeling ever indoor is
very coach driven and staff driven so like adam
gets that feeling from indoor and then the players
the information is like filtered down to the
players on the beach I can relate because there
were have when I played there were no coaches
on the benches that could communicate so like
I would create the play calls based on what the
information I had been gathering all match and
the same thing like if you create a play and
you elicit the response that you expected from
that it's such a good feeling so good but basically
In each rotation, and correct me if this is too
simplified, you are breaking down set distributions
based on the potential middle attack routes.
Yep. You are also adding in a layer of where
the pass is coming from. Correct. And then you
can add in a deeper layer of what a player will
do after they pass to attack. Correct. So you're
layering on options. It can be as simple or as
complex as you want or as your players are capable
of understanding. But that is the gist. Yeah.
Normally you're doing this for your own team
after matches. So I want to know what other teams
are thinking about our tendencies. Where are
we predictable as a team? Where do we need to
change our distributions? How can we be exploited?
And top level teams are constantly looking at
their own footage, at their own stats. and trying
to understand, and that formulates what you work
on in practice and how you do those distributions.
So it's a continuous cycle. And from the college
perspective, I would say in recent years, that's
why everybody talks about why it's so hard to
defend Nebraska, because their set distribution
is so equal across the board, generally speaking.
I hope that gave you some clarity into... Did
you see him light up, everybody? If you're watching
on YouTube, did you see the joy on this man's
face as he was talking about this? I do. I do
enjoy it. I hope that gives you some clarity
into maybe what coaches are thinking, what teams
are doing, the amounts of information athletes
are processing at any given time to do it properly,
where they make mistakes or where they make misses.
And it's fun as a fan to sit down and go, oh,
I wonder what they're doing. Oh, I wonder if
that was intentional. And then you'll start to
pick up some of these tendencies, whether it
be serving or block lineups or defense. And for
me, it makes the game a little more enjoyable.
But if you have any other questions, feel free
to shoot us them on YouTube or on Instagram.
And I'm definitely happy to revisit this topic
as it's clear. And we just love that we have
helped some of you become more critical consumers
of volleyball. From an offensive and defensive
perspective and now statistically a game plan
perspective, it's been really cool to see and
get feedback of how you guys are consuming the
sport now. It's great. We have gotten a lot of
questions about who our first team All -American
picks would be. And major ABCA award winners,
namely freshman of the year, player of the year,
coach of the year. We worked together on this
to put together a list. We are aware that the
semifinalists for ABCA national player of the
year have come out. I feel like that could be
the first team All -American list in and of itself.
But we've put together a list. mid -majors much
i've watched a lot of big west because of my
like commentating stuff but we haven't watched
a lot so most of our players are from like top
ranked programs yeah and there could be a couple
athletes flying under the radar for sure this
is by no means comprehensive and we haven't seen
everybody but i think a lot of them make sense
so let's rattle off a few here tell me these
are in no particular order so we're gonna have
to start with our 24 and then we're gonna have
to cut it down yes do you want to start with
ones who will probably who will probably cut
I would say who would who would be on the list
for sure okay I think your for sure's and my
for sure's are probably different I'm gonna go
down the list we'll just go one at a time and
you tell me for sure or not for sure and then
go from there I just say keep them or not and
then we'll see how many we end up with. And then
we'll cut it down again. This is in no particular
order. Andy Jackson. Keeper. Mark that down.
Bergen Riley. Keeper. Rebecca Alec. Keeper. Marie.
Keeper. Collier. Yes. Booth. No. Delay. Yeah.
Hudson. Yeah. Are you agreeing with all these?
Okay. Lednicki. Keeper. Babcock. Yeah, Keeper.
Kennedy Martin. Yes. Herrera Colon. Yes. Did
you like that accent you threw in? I tried. I
tried. As of right now, we're 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. Oh, fantastic. So we have
three more spots. I'll tell you. No, we have
to just work through it. Okay, we'll keep going.
I have Casa Paula. Texas A &M is ranked sixth.
She is statistically having a fantastic year.
Okay, we'll keep her for now. Okay. Kara Cressy.
Keep her for now. We'll see where we end up.
I have Lizzie Carr. I know that's a stretch.
No, take her off. Schumacher. Libero from UCLA.
Okay. You guys, if I had to pick a Libero to
be on this list this year, it would be her. Granted,
I understand she's not playing for a great team,
but what she is doing for that team is incredible.
I don't think she will be a first -team All -American,
but if I were to pick a libero, it would probably
be her. But I would say take her off. We have
the same opinion. I have watched her play a few
times. She does all of the things a libero should
do and then covers an immense amount of court
on defense. Her ability to read and dig and to
set. She's very good. I'm impressed. I had to
put her on the list personally. Malaya Jones.
She's had a good season. Keep her on for now.
Stafford. Yeah, keep her on. Wallard. Oh. Okay,
keep her for now just so I can see how many we
have. Glover. Okay, I'm basically saying yes
to everybody. Okay, well, if we're comparing
her to the likes of Martin or Babcock, I'll say
no. Okay. Ava Martin. I don't think she's at
the level of certain other players. Elia Rubin.
Yeah. Okay. So that was kind of the long list.
What are Martin's numbers? Ava Martin was at
4 .88 points a set. That was her big stat. Okay.
So we have 17. And the tough thing is, you know.
Wait, so we just have to cut three from that?
We have to cut three from that. Okay, do you
think they would actually give four from Nebraska?
I think one of them probably won't get it. One
of them probably won't get it. And Andy Jackson
will probably win it over Alec. Yeah. But I think
personally Alec deserves it. I think that Alec
will be the one out. I would even argue take
Harper Murray off of that four. You're about
to be crucified. It happens every week. Why not?
So let's be frank. Those four are good enough
to be All -Americans. But when we're comparing
outsides, DeLay, Hudson, Stafford, I think do
more than Murray. Not that they're looking at
positions and being like, yeah, we have to keep
it even by position. I don't think they care
about that. But Heredia Colon is doing more than
Murray. So is this a byproduct for you that she
plays on Nebraska and it's more even? You think
if she played for another team, she would get
the nod? No, I think her numbers compared to
other outsides that are on this list are not
comparable. How does Alec and Jackson's numbers
compare to other middles? I mean, Andy Jackson
has the highest hitting percentage. Rebecca Alec
is very high on blocks per set and hitting percentage.
Jackson's number one, I think Alec is 14. They're
both putting numbers up. If we're looking at
middles, I think they're both better than Cressy.
Cressy means more. Well, I think they're the
best middle duo in the country. The question
is, are they going to give Nebraska four first
-team All -Americans? And I would say probably
not. No, they probably aren't going to. And again,
we've talked about this in awards on a team like
this. But if you're looking at it straight from
a skill standpoint, they deserve four. I don't
disagree with you. Yeah. Probably Wallard. Like,
she's there because Purdue. Take Wallard out.
Wallard would be off. Cressy is... Probably realistically
more of a second team choice. Kosok Paula is
probably also more of a second round choice if
we're looking at middles to be fair. Probably
those ones. Okay, which ones would you 100 %
feeling they are going to be on the list? Jackson,
Riley, Collier, DeLay, Hudson, Lednicki, Babcock,
Martin, Heredia, Colon. So you think they're
going to put Lednicki, Babcock, and Martin three
opposites? Yes. And Malaya Jones. Yes. You think
Malaya Jones is going to be first team All -American?
I think her numbers are off the charts. Hit me
with her numbers. I believe she was at 4 .1 kills
per set hitting 371. I think she has the highest
efficiency of any of those hitters. I think she's
going to be on it. I think Stafford for sure.
Her numbers have been very, very good. I actually
think Ruben might be a second team. I don't think
they'll put her second team. I think she's very
important to Stanford, but her numbers aren't
as good as the other outsides. Really? Yeah.
We're keeping four opposites. I think all four
of those will be first -team All -Americans.
Do you think both Hudson and DeLay? I think you
have to. Okay, the ones you have to for me, Collier,
Martin, Babcock are musts because they carry
their team. Heredia Colon needs to be there.
Those four need to be there. Stafford. Are her
numbers that good? Very good. Okay, Stafford.
I think Bergen -Riley needs to be there. So that's
six for sure that need to be there. It's an interesting
question. I'm curious how they make the final
decision. Do they take... Conference into account?
Do they take position into account? You know,
I think it was a lean year for Setters and Liberos.
I agree. Quite frankly. Well, then people would
Charlie Furbringer make the long list. I like
Charlie. I think the fact that she missed the
amount of time that she missed hurts her chances
of being a first team. Okay, so who are our four
team then? I think it will go to Jackson over
Alec. Riley, I think they will also give it to
Murray. That's three. Collier, DeLay. Hudson,
Lednicki, Babcock, Martin, Heredia Colon, Malaya
Jones, Stafford, 12, Rubin maybe for 13, and
Kosokpola maybe? Schumacher maybe? No, I would
say Kosokpola over Schumacher. Okay, there you
go. Who do you have for freshman of the year?
Okay, in no particular order, here were my considerations.
Suli Davis from BYU, Alana Clemente from Oregon,
Jaden Jagger from Indiana, Kari Spears from Texas,
Erica Sayre from Stanford, and Logan Parks, also
from Stanford. Those were kind of who was in
the running for me. If you were to ask me a month
ago, I would say that Kari Spears would run away
with this award. The way she started the season,
I was like, okay. incredibly impressive. She
has come back to earth. I would even argue that
Vanderwall on her own team may have surpassed
her in my opinion. Yeah. That's not, that's not
a terrible take. And I think Vanderwall would
be also a consideration on the list. If we were
going to add one more, I, for me, I think Suli
Davis is it for freshman of the year. Her numbers
are really good. I believe she has better numbers
than any of the other freshmen. She's also been
a go -to player for BYU and she's been consistent
all year. I think she is my pick for freshman
of the year. And I think Alana Clemente would
be my second choice. I like Alana Clemente. I
don't know if they'll give it to her because
her team is like not doing well. I mean, now
there's BYU. I mean, Clemente just 355 kills
on the year hitting 374. Very, very impressive.
374 is pretty good. Yeah. I like Parks. She like
started the season. I like Sayer too. I think
if the freshman class wasn't quite this strong,
Parks would have a very good case to win it.
But Sui Davis and Clemente are putting up like
numbers to be in consideration for All -American.
Like those stats are impressive. Like Oregon's
in a good conference. Suli Davis is playing in
the messy Big 12. I get that it's not quite as
high a level. I think Suli Davis will be given
a second team All -American probably. Yeah, I
would agree with that. Okay, my pick freshman
of the year is Suli Davis. Yeah, me too. Coach
of the year. I think Danny Busboom has done an
incredible job with Nebraska. I don't think she's
going to win it. Really? No. Maybe. I think she
has a very good chance of winning it. I think
what Dave Shandell did at Purdue was incredible,
but I don't think his team will advance far enough
for him to win it. See, I, okay. I wasn't taking
that into consideration. I'm looking at just
value brought to the team. So in that case, then
yes, probably Danny will win. Like when do you
ever see a coach of the year that doesn't make
the final four? I'm sure somebody is going to
give me a whole roster stat sheet of like the
examples, but. Okay. I mean, yes. Fair enough.
Who else did I think did a good job? I think
Shondell did a really good job. I think, again,
Oregon didn't end up doing as well as I thought
they would, but I thought he, Trent, did a great
job at Oregon. I was impressed with their team.
Considering they started from scratch, basically.
Yeah. Indiana came on strong. We've talked about
the coaches that we like, but I think Craig Skinner,
a case could be made for Craig Skinner. True.
True. But I mean, if Nebraska continues to go
undefeated and they make the final four, it's
hard to argue that Danny hasn't done. I mean,
she's got all the pieces, but they were very
consistent. If Nebraska makes the final four,
Danny Busby, I think will win. I think that's
a fair take. Do I think she brings the most value
to her team? Probably not, but it's still hard
to get to produce the results that she's produced
this season. Player of the year. I think it's
going to be Bergen Riley. I really do. I think
it'll be Bergen -Riley. Nebraska has had a historic
season. I don't think any of their hitters have
been so dominant that they deserve player of
the year. And in that case, I think it goes to
Bergen -Riley. Yep. I agree. There you have it.
Our predictions. All Americans. Big awards. Let
us know your thoughts. I'm sure we are going
to hear about it. Love it. So hit us up. All
right, we're going to dive into our listener
questions of the week. Okay, question one. What
do you think of Cassie O 'Brien at Kentucky as
a setter and possibly running a 5 -2 at some
point? You don't see that too often. I mean,
there just aren't that many setters who are also
offensive like that. Listen, in the college game,
you pretty much never have. What's a 5 -2 for
people who don't know? Okay, so a 5 -2 is essentially.
A 6 -2 where one of your setters is hitting.
Cassie O 'Brien, when she's in the back row,
she will be the setter, and they'll have another
opposite in the front row hitting. When Cassie
rotates to the front row, they'll sub the other
right side out for another setter, and Cassie
will hit in the front row. So she will be that
hitter. Exactly the same thing as a 6 -2, except
Cassie in this case is going to hit when she's
in the front row. So you always have three front
row attacking options. I don't hate it. Honestly,
she'll be in better rhythm because she's staying
on the floor. Was she a hitter in high school?
I think so. I think and club. I think they played
a 6 -2 all the way through. Hitting in club and
hitting in college is two different things. We'll
see how good she is at that. But I don't dislike
it. And I think you need to try to find ways
to maximize the talents on your roster. And if
that works for Kentucky, then absolutely. As
far as her setting, I think she's good for sure.
I think she makes some freshman. mistakes like
when the wheels fall off they they fall off or
you'll see certain lack of experience type of
errors but i i think she's good yeah she definitely
falls into a trap of just setting delay and hudson
i mean would i feel like anybody would maybe
fair but that's where she has to grow is running
a more balanced offense understanding when to
push the middle when to use your right side.
You can't just set two players. I mean, they've
been successful this year doing it. And maybe
it'll be proven wrong, but yes, that would be
where the growth is, I think. Okay, question
two. Is there anything blockers can do to avoid
hitters using them to recycle off the block?
Why don't more blockers pull their hands down
when hitters are hitting off the net out of system?
It seems like... In more cases, the hitters catch
hands that sends the ball flying in an awkward
trajectory rather than the block being effective.
Okay, so there's actually quite a lot to unpack
in that question. Being used on the recycle.
So when I hear the term recycle, I think of a
hitter's not in a good position. They use the
block to rebound it back to their own side to
give their team a chance. Yeah. There's nothing
you can do about that. No. Getting tooled. Correct.
Is a different story where somebody is going
off and as this question asked, ricocheting the
ball off the block into the crowd or whatever.
I will ask you this because on the beach, tooling
the block is a very big thing because you're
generally one on one. Not many people attempt
it unless the ball is real tight. Right. But
you are very good as a blocker at identifying
when a hitter is trying to do that and pulling
your hands down. So I think that's a very high.
level skill I don't think a lot of college players
can do it well what makes it so challenging and
what do you have to do to be successful at it
I will say I think it's more obvious on the beach
because people are more limited physically and
so what a player is trying to do is given away
more by their physical tells whereas in indoor
you can do a lot of stuff while you're in the
air so take this with a grain of salt I guess
but even having played both you can kind of tell
what a hitter's intention is. Like if they are
going up with the sole intention of completely
wiping you off, you can see their hips close
to the net. You can see their shoulders completely
close. And so that is generally an indicator
that they are going to try to take the ball to
the line. You can tell by the trajectory of the
set if a hitter is going to be in trouble. And
then that combined with how they are aligning
their hips and shoulders on their approach, you
can deduce what they're trying to do. Sometimes
you might do that and the hitter will score,
will hit it down the line. That's not great.
But the ones who are, I see, I don't even know
how often hitters are going up with the intention
of swinging into the stands, though. It's fair.
To be honest, I don't think hitters go up. You
can tell when a hitter is going up with the intention
of like completely using a block. Well, and so
the one scenario that they use here is the set
off the net, right? The set off the net, that's
a blocking issue. Yes, to me, that's a technical
issue of you not being in the right place, your
timing either being wrong or your hand positioning
being wrong. But the thing you have to remember
is. You have a responsibility as a blocker. You
have generally four other people playing defense
around you. If you decide to vacate your responsibility
and they swing where you're supposed to be, your
coach is going to be very unhappy with you. You
have to be 100 % sure that they're trying to
tool you to pull your hands down. Otherwise,
you're causing a liability. The other thing is
you have to have very good vision and very quick
decision -making to decide to pull your hands
down. And I don't think there's a ton of college
players who are processing the game at that level
to be able to make that good read consistently.
Yeah, I mean, I think you have to understand
the type of hitter you have too. Like if you
have a person who is just a horse that's going
to go for it, I would probably block more often.
If you have a hitter that's air averse. And who
doesn't like to hit in uncomfortable situations.
In that scenario, it needs to be a conversation
of like, let's vacate. Well, and the other thing
I will say is I don't consider somebody hitting
the tops of your fingers and going out the back.
That's not being tooled. That's a very good offensive
swing. And there's nothing you can do about that.
A tool is rattling through your arms, hitting
the side of your arm, off the side of your hand
and out of bounds. Or deliberately swinging for
the bleachers in the sideline. Yeah. They are
not looking for the court. Exactly. Question
three, as we're coming up on selection time,
could you go over how that works? I get lost
when some teams in very tough conferences don't
make it, even though they're really good teams.
So basically there are 64 teams that make it.
There are 31 conferences and the conference winner,
each conference winner is guaranteed. So that's
31 right off the board. And that only leaves
33. remaining spots and so those spots tend they
tend to do it by rpi so quick recap of what rpi
is yeah your strength of opponents that you have
played in your kind of pre -conference mode as
well all counts towards your ranking whether
you win in three whether you win in four whether
you win in five what the ranking of your opponent
is when you play it's very formulaic which calculates
kind of your strength of schedule and how you
perform to give a ranking. So that's why you
see top teams really overload their preseason
these days is because their strength of their
opponent is so strong. And if they're getting
wins against those strong opponents, that boosts
their RPI. So even if they don't win their conference,
they're going to be ranked higher. But it also
takes into account how... your opponent's opponents
and how your opponents do against those people.
So top teams guarantee themselves spots by playing
tough teams who play other tough teams and getting
wins against them. And so it ranks every single
team in the NCAA on those metrics. And so the
remaining 33 teams are taken from that pretty
much. Now it's not a straight take. Like there
are some considerations of X number of teams
from this conference, from that conference. They
do pick some outside of the big four that end
up going in that have good season. So it's not
just, you know, those teams come out, but it's
pretty close. It's, I mean, at the end of the
day, it is college sports. So like, yeah, they
could probably pull from only power four conferences
aside from the top 30. the 31 conference winners,
but yeah, you don't, that's boring. Yeah. So
yeah, that's why you kind of see it a little
more mixed. I mean, I think what, like nine teams
were taken from the big 10 last year. I don't
know. Half of the big 10 made it. Yeah. If you're
not finishing in the top half, you might be better
than some of the teams that get to go, but like,
come on, but you don't get to go like it. Let's
draw a line somewhere. You know what I mean?
So, yeah, it can be a little confusing. But if
you're in a power four conference, if you're
finishing in the top six, at least you're probably
safe. Question four. Can you explain how volleyball
fantasy leagues work? I mean, you should mention
that. Yeah, there's all kinds of different formats
you can do. The one that we did this year was
done. Shout out to Around the Block Volley. Check
them out on Instagram. Yeah, they hosted one
and it was a lot of fun. So we did a snake draft.
We picked 10 players. You have seven active players
each week who gain points. Every positive kill
or terminal action is worth a point. Errors are
negative points. Digs count for one. Assists
count for half. And you just accumulate points
from the beginning of the season to the end of
the tournament. So that's one way to do it. There's
all kinds of... fantasy volleyball leagues and
things you can do in terms of you know picking
set scores or picking who wins this in three
four or five and you could build teams that last
more than a year where you're doing a draft at
the beginning of the year like there's all kinds
of different fantasy you can do i actually had
so much fun this year playing fantasy volleyball
that i'm i'm working on putting out a fantasy
volleyball website so when that's done i'll let
you guys know Stay tuned. I have some interesting
ideas for both NCAA, some of the US Pro Leagues,
and then international. So stay tuned. That'll
be coming. I think it's going to be a lot of
fun. Basically, you have modifiers for each skill.
Yeah. So you have to determine which skills are
going to earn you the most points and then pick
players who will earn you those points. So for
example, like... Our libero in our fantasy league,
a dig is worth a point. An assist is worth a
point. Aces. Our libero is the Valparaiso libero.
Because here's the thing. Those rallies go forever.
The rallies aren't as terminal in mid -major
volleyball. So the people are getting way more
digs. so you want like we picked a mid -major
libero who is just crushing it because like you
don't want to pick a libero from like a power
four conferences because the players are so terminal
they're not getting as many digs so it's just
like interesting to explore yeah and see what
is important to you or what you think will get
you the most points which positions stuff like
that and then going from there so i'm also going
to put like the ability to choose a conference
you could keep all your players within a conference
or pick a couple conferences there'll be there's
all kinds of ways that you can do it and collect
points it's it's quite fun actually and then
like you have a 10 person roster and then picking
who's on your active roster and like who's on
the bent like it's pretty cool you can trade
with people you're on or pick up players who
haven't been picked up we have to figure out
how to do it with like a draft with people not
in the same place correct you know what i mean
so that nobody picks the same player but Very
fun. Really helps you stay engaged and maybe
watch certain teams that you wouldn't watch.
So, yeah, it's great. Question five. Can you
talk about Gigi at Tennessee and the glow up
she's had this year compared to her time at Wisconsin?
Is there something Tennessee is doing to train
passing that Wisconsin isn't? I mean, in watching
Tennessee this year, Gigi definitely seems a
lot more confident. I don't know if it's because
she played for one of the top teams in the country
and just kind of feels like a big dog now with
this new team. Like that could be part of it.
It's just like she feels more confident because
of where she's come from. Maybe it's not having
the confidence to take the scene with Sarah Franklin
or being uncertain about who you're playing with.
Or the pressure. Yeah, or the pressure. Any number
of reasons. There might be a few technical pointers
that maybe Tennessee pointed out to her that
helps her out. Listen, some coaches don't. I
think passing is a mental skill, honestly. I
do too. If you get in your own head about it,
you're toast. That's totally fair. It is obviously
a technical skill too. No, but what I was going
to say is sometimes two coaches can tell you
the same thing in a slightly different way and
it just makes sense for you. Coming from one
versus the other. Which could also be the case.
Same fundamentals but think about it this way.
And then it just works. There's a couple reasons
something like that could happen. Question six.
So we've talked about how Chloe Chacon probably
can't play pro as an outside. Do you think she
could play pro as a libero or is it too late?
There are so many defensive players that it might
not be too late for her to build that skill set.
But the chances of a team taking a chance on
her to play libero without her having proved
it probably just means she won't get the opportunity,
not that she's not capable of it. That would
be my take. But she could definitely, like, she
could probably play left side for a PVF team
or an MLV team and maybe do the transition there
and work on getting some film. But pro -pro league
overseas probably won't take a flyer on somebody
like that at the libero position. Okay, last
question of the week. If you are less physical,
can you make up for it with more skill? Within
reason. If you're 5 '4 and you touch 9 '8, it's
going to be hard to score. If you're 5 '10 and
you're a few inches lower than your other competitors,
yes. Good fundamentals, good decision making,
being smart and crafty. Until you get to the
top, top, top levels. I 100 % believe that you
can make up for that and that you could play
NCAA. All right, there's some interesting matches
in these last final weeks of the NCAA. So here
are a few to pay attention to as you're off for
Thanksgiving, if you can squeeze them in between
your football viewing. Wednesday at 3 p .m. Eastern,
we have Baylor versus TCU. I mean, somebody has
to win, so one of those teams will get a win.
We'll see. Wednesday at 7 p .m. Eastern, we have
Louisville versus Pitt. Circle that one. That'll
be a great game. Purdue versus Minnesota. Purdue
needs to right the ship. Just do the split screen
with those ones. Yes, absolutely. Dual monitor.
Also Wednesday at 7 .30 Eastern, we have Kansas
versus Iowa State. Kansas has been on one. Iowa
State has also been winning. So we'll see what
happens with those ones. Love it. Yeah. As always,
same as usual. Friday at 9 p .m. Eastern, we
have Minnesota versus Wisconsin. If Wisconsin
plays like they did this week, probably they
will roll 3 -0 on that one. But Minnesota has
been interesting to watch. Probably should have
had some freshmen on the list, but they weren't
quite that good. No. Saturday, we have Stanford
versus Louisville. Louisville has a big weekend.
They have a big weekend. And that Stanford -Louisville
match. We'll just star that one. Well, Pitt is
in the running, too. Let's not forget about them.
True. Star those ACC matchups. It'll be good
viewing. And then Saturday at 3 p .m., BYU versus
Colorado. And Saturday, also at 7 p .m., Indiana
versus Purdue. Actually, that could potentially
be a very good game. Very fast offense against
a very well -prepared team. That will be a good
match, I think, to watch. Yeah, lots of good
viewing this week if you have some time to sit
down and watch. That concludes this week's episode
of Volley Talk. There's always something shaking
in the volleyball world, and we hope you enjoyed
this little fix. Be sure to follow the show so
you don't miss any updates. And we'd be so grateful
if you'd leave us a five -star review. Baby wants
you to do it too. You can also find us on Instagram
at volleytalk underscore podcast. If you have
a topic you'd like us to discuss, you can reach
out to us on Instagram or at info at sarahpavin
.com. Thanks so much for joining us and we'll
be back next week.