2019 Black Ink - Preliminary Rankings

[bluepenquin]

2018 is in the books - so who should be the best teams for 2019 (pretty much the same teams as 2018).  Black Ink is a scoring system by assigning points to players for various awards (Senior Ace rank, Under Armor All-American, All-Conference Team, and All-American).  Black Ink is an attempt to measure talent on the roster.  

This is preliminary since there will be many changes to these rosters with transfers, retirements, and such.  Also, the total team scores may have insignificant differences among multiple teams ranked higher or lower - so it may be more appropriate to think in terms of tiers instead of the actual ranking.

Below is the Black Ink score of the current roster (including incoming freshman) with the % of production returning in parenthesis.  % of production is calculated by averaging the % of Kills, Assists, Digs, and Blocks returning from 2018.  This method will put a premium on a setter - particularly a 5-1 setter.  Because of this, I wouldn't totally rely on this, but it does give us a directional % returning.

1. Stanford - 132.5 (91%)
2. Wisconsin - 112 (92%)
3. Texas - 95 (83%)
4. Minnesota - 90.5 (71%)
5. Nebraska - 89 (76%)
6. Florida - 86.5 (72%)
7. Oregon - 84 (44%)
8. Penn State - 82.5 (63%)
9. Kentucky - 77 (85%)
10. USC - 76.5 (78%)
11. BYU - 72 (44%)
12. Purdue - 69.5 (78%)
13. UCLA - 63 (61%)
14. TCU - 58.5 (78%)
15. Washington - 56.5 (93%)
16. Illinois - 50.5 (55%)
17. Baylor - 48.5 (87%)
18. LSU - 48 (58%)
19. Michigan - 44.5 (74%)
20. Texas A&M - 43 (91%)
21. Michigan State - 42.5 (91%)
22. Ohio State - 42 (83%)
23. Louisville - 41 (53%)
24. Florida State - 39 (65%)
25. Notre Dame - 38 (71%)

Arizona - 38 (87%)
Pittsburgh - 37.5 (76%)
Missouri - 37 (89%)
Marquette - 36 (75%)
Cal - 35.5 (94%)
North Carolina - 34.5 (88%)
Utah - 34 (91%)
Creighton - 33 (71%)
Kansas - 33 (79%)
Northwestern - 32.5 (100%)
Iowa State - 32 (72%)
Kansas State - 31 (62%)
Duke - 31 (49%)
Auburn - 30 (57%)
Pepperdine - 29.5 (62%)
South Carolina - 28.5 (89%)
Tennessee - 28 (81%)
Maryland - 27 (89%)
Colorado - 27 (74%)
UCSB - 26 (89%)
Indiana - 24 (93%)
Georgia - 23.5 (64%)
Dayton - 23 (68%)
Cal Poly - 22.5 (78%)
Rice - 21.5 (89%)
Colorado State - 21 (100%)
Virginia - 20.5 (99%)
Western Kentucky - 20 (76%)
Iowa - 20 (68%)
Loyola Marymount - 19 (75%)
Alabama - 18.5 (82%)
Miami-FL - 18.5 (59%)
San Diego - 17.5 (75%)
Oklahoma - 17.5 (78%)
Ole Miss - 16.5 (82%)
Cincinnati - 16 (53%)
Hawaii - 15.5 (45%)
Clemson - 15.5 (100%)
Arkansas - 14.5 (79%)
Villanova - 13.5 (81%)
Denver - 13 (78%)
Washington State - 12.5 (55%)
UC Irvine - 11.5 (46%)
Long Beach State - 10.5 (71%)
UCF - 10.5 (90%)
Texas Tech - 10.5 (61%)

[bluepenquin]

Here is the list if we only look at the core 8 players (S,OH,OH,MB,MB,RS,L,DS) or 9 players if the team is likely to use a 6-2.

1. Stanford - 93.5
2. Wisconsin - 84
3. Texas - 69.5
4. Penn State - 68
5. Minnesota - 66
6. Nebraska - 66
7. Kentucky - 65
8. Oregon - 64
9. Florida - 55
10. USC - 50.5
11. UCLA - 49.5
12. BYU - 46.5
13. Purdue - 46
14. Baylor - 42
15. LSU - 39
16. Washington - 38.5
17. Illinois - 35
18. Michigan State - 34.5
19. Florida State - 32
20. Notre Dame - 32
21. TCU - 31
22. Marquette - 31
23. Louisville - 30
24. North Carolina - 29.5
25. Ohio State - 27.5

Pittsburgh - 27
Kansas State - 27
Missouri - 26.5
Cal - 26
Duke - 26
Utah - 25.5
Creighton - 24.5
Arizona - 24
Maryland - 24
Texas A&M - 22
Kansas - 22
Michigan - 21.5
Auburn - 21.5
South Carolina - 21
Tennessee - 21
Colorado - 21
Iowa State - 20
Dayton - 18
Rice - 18
Colorado State - 18
Northwestern - 17.5
Pepperdine - 17.5
Western Kentucky - 17
UCSB - 16.5
Cal Poly - 16
Cincinnati - 16
San Diego - 15.5
Hawaii - 15.5
Georgia - 15
Iowa - 15
Oklahoma - 15
Indiana - 14
Alabama - 13.5
Virginia - 12.5
Ole Miss - 12.5
Denver - 12.5
Washington State - 12
UC Irvine - 11.5
Loyola Marymount - 11
Miami-FL - 10.5
Long Beach State - 10.5

[bluepenquin]

Looking at where some transfers would have the biggest impact.

Minnesota would appear to need a setter and with Kylie Miller and Mica Allison both available, I have to think Minnesota gets one of these. Either would move Minnesota up 6.5 points in their core starter group and put them as the #3 team. Miller is such the obvious choice given that she has just one year of eligibility - which better fits Minnesota's pipeline.

Kentucky could use a MB. Freshman Isabella Bell may be the likely MB - or they could pick up Leah Meyer and add experience and move them up in their BIS.

USC - Black Ink Score is badly missing on setter Lazaro since she is foreign and gets no points from senior aces.

BYU - I have no idea who is their setter for this coming season? The addition of Allison or Miller could have a significant impact on their team. I doubt it happens - but from the outside Allison would make a lot of sense for both the player and school.

Baylor - Here is another place where Allison would make sense depending on how Baylor feels about Lockin. Baylor badly needs a RS. This team has superstars Pressley and Fanning and incoming Freshman Kara McGhee (the highest rated Baylor recruit). Gia Milano probably goes back to OH where she plays better than RS. They need someone for the RS.

Illinois - I forgot they have Diana Brown. Assuming they still like her - I don't see any reason for bringing in a transfer setter. The issue with Illinois is going to be MB where they don't appear to have what they need.

[gophervbfan]

All indications point towards Kylie Miller enrolling at Minnesota in January. She is supposedly sick of the California weather and is looking forward to ice fishing in Minnesota.

[Wolfgang]

Ugh...math.

[After Dawn]

if this is any indicator of how the bigwest will do next year this is would be amazing! 6 teams in the top 65 NICE

[ay2013]

Dec 16, 2018 9:37:47 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

2018 is in the books - so who should be the best teams for 2019 (pretty much the same teams as 2018).  Black Ink is a scoring system by assigning points to players for various awards (Senior Ace rank, Under Armor All-American, All-Conference Team, and All-American).  Black Ink is an attempt to measure talent on the roster.  

This is preliminary since there will be many changes to these rosters with transfers, retirements, and such.  Also, the total team scores may have insignificant differences among multiple teams ranked higher or lower - so it may be more appropriate to think in terms of tiers instead of the actual ranking.

Below is the Black Ink score of the current roster (including incoming freshman) with the % of production returning in parenthesis.  % of production is calculated by averaging the % of Kills, Assists, Digs, and Blocks returning from 2018.  This method will put a premium on a setter - particularly a 5-1 setter.  Because of this, I wouldn't totally rely on this, but it does give us a directional % returning.

1. Stanford - 132.5 (91%)
2. Wisconsin - 112 (92%)
3. Texas - 95 (83%)
4. Minnesota - 90.5 (71%)
5. Nebraska - 89 (76%)
6. Florida - 86.5 (72%)
7. Oregon - 84 (44%)
8. Penn State - 82.5 (63%)
9. Kentucky - 77 (85%)
10. USC - 76.5 (78%)
11. BYU - 72 (44%)
12. Purdue - 69.5 (78%)
13. UCLA - 63 (61%)
14. TCU - 58.5 (78%)
15. Washington - 56.5 (93%)
16. Illinois - 50.5 (55%)
17. Baylor - 48.5 (87%)
18. LSU - 48 (58%)
19. Michigan - 44.5 (74%)
20. Texas A&M - 43 (91%)
21. Michigan State - 42.5 (91%)
22. Ohio State - 42 (83%)
23. Louisville - 41 (53%)
24. Florida State - 39 (65%)
25. Notre Dame - 38 (71%)

Arizona - 38 (87%)
Pittsburgh - 37.5 (76%)
Missouri - 37 (89%)
Marquette - 36 (75%)
Cal - 35.5 (94%)
North Carolina - 34.5 (88%)
Utah - 34 (91%)
Creighton - 33 (71%)
Kansas - 33 (79%)
Northwestern - 32.5 (100%)
Iowa State - 32 (72%)
Kansas State - 31 (62%)
Duke - 31 (49%)
Auburn - 30 (57%)
Pepperdine - 29.5 (62%)
South Carolina - 28.5 (89%)
Tennessee - 28 (81%)
Maryland - 27 (89%)
Colorado - 27 (74%)
UCSB - 26 (89%)
Indiana - 24 (93%)
Georgia - 23.5 (64%)
Dayton - 23 (68%)
Cal Poly - 22.5 (78%)
Rice - 21.5 (89%)
Colorado State - 21 (100%)
Virginia - 20.5 (99%)
Western Kentucky - 20 (76%)
Iowa - 20 (68%)
Loyola Marymount - 19 (75%)
Alabama - 18.5 (82%)
Miami-FL - 18.5 (59%)
San Diego - 17.5 (75%)
Oklahoma - 17.5 (78%)
Ole Miss - 16.5 (82%)
Cincinnati - 16 (53%)
Hawaii - 15.5 (45%)
Clemson - 15.5 (100%)
Arkansas - 14.5 (79%)
Villanova - 13.5 (81%)
Denver - 13 (78%)
Washington State - 12.5 (55%)
UC Irvine - 11.5 (46%)
Long Beach State - 10.5 (71%)
UCF - 10.5 (90%)
Texas Tech - 10.5 (61%)

I know TCU is bringing in a stellar recruiting class, but something is off on your methodology when a sweet 16 team that returns everyone is ranked below a team that didn’t even make the tournament.

Also, not sure how much weight you give to senior aces ranking but at some point shouldn’t that just not matter anymore? Taking a small example, Bajema is probably being hurt by her senior aces ranking even though she’s very productive for Washington, meanwhile a player like Abaji at Texas is probably adding with her senior aces ranking even though she has done jack sh*t for 3 years. Or Miller for UCLA. And that’s just off the top of my head. I’m sure here are a number of juniors and seniors who were top 30 recruits years ago that simply have not panned out. Are they getting senior aces bumps for their teams?

[baytree]

Dec 16, 2018 14:52:34 GMT -5 After Dawn said:

if this is any indicator of how the bigwest will do next year this is would be amazing! 6 teams in the top 65 NICE

I wouldn't get to excited yet. I don't think it's that different from the 2018 season. And, as ay2013 notes, it's not great at predicting how teams will fare in competition. TBF, I don't think it was designed to do that. 

UCSB was 44th with 23 points last year. This year, they're 45th with 26, so maybe a slight improvement. 

Hawaii was in a 3-way tie for 46th with 21 points last year. This year, they're 62nd with 15.5 so they've dropped. (This does ignore Westerberg and Hellvig for Hawaii but it also ignore other foreign recruits for other teams who may also have good recruits coming in.)

Cal Poly was 51st with 20 points. (You can see how crowded it gets at this level when a difference of one point drops you that many places.) This year they're 49th with 22.5 so slightly better. The Black Ink score underrated them compared to how they were rated in RPI and in the AVCA and VT polls last season. It will be interesting to see if the same thing happens in 2019. 

I think it only went to 60 last season. UC-Irvine and Long Beach State were below 60 in both seasons. 

[gbuttah]

LOL @ Michigan State's score putting them in the top 25. They may have decent recruits but they looked damn awful this year. What's going on Cathy?

[bigfan]

I think 2019 is Stanford's to lose.

[bluepenquin]

Dec 16, 2018 16:05:14 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

Dec 16, 2018 9:37:47 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

I know TCU is bringing in a stellar recruiting class, but something is off on your methodology when a sweet 16 team that returns everyone is ranked below a team that didn’t even make the tournament.

Also, not sure how much weight you give to senior aces ranking but at some point shouldn’t that just not matter anymore? Taking a small example, Bajema is probably being hurt by her senior aces ranking even though she’s very productive for Washington, meanwhile a player like Abaji at Texas is probably adding with her senior aces ranking even though she has done jack sh*t for 3 years. Or Miller for UCLA. And that’s just off the top of my head. I’m sure here are a number of juniors and seniors who were top 30 recruits years ago that simply have not panned out. Are they getting senior aces bumps for their teams?

That is kind of why I like the 2nd list of the core 8 - so if you have a high senior ace that got injured or didn't pan out, then their score isn't included.  TCU is only #21 on that list compared to #16 for Washington.  Bajema and McCall have the same point value of 8.5 (most for their team).  Those top 10 teams usually have at least a couple players with more than 10 points.

TCU has Buckingham (top 20 SA) who cannot get healthy.  They also have a couple of high Freshman recruits that are likely to be blocked from starting their 1st year.  That said - there should be no mistaking the fact that TCU is putting together some really good talent.  They have 3 more years of McCall and Nails or Adams as Top 20 Freshman as outside hitters.  Unlike some other teams - they are accumulating the much tougher OH recruits.

While a team like LSU is much more difficult to see their path.  Their 3 big time players are natural MB - so unless on of them (Bannister) can transition to the pin, they are going to have some waste.

And then some programs do a much better job of developing players that don't necessarily score high on HS recruit lists.  Hawaii comes to mind - along with several other teams in the West and a team like Pittsburgh this past year.

[bigfan]

Dec 16, 2018 9:37:47 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

2018 is in the books - so who should be the best teams for 2019 (pretty much the same teams as 2018). 

Congratulations and thank you for all the contributions you make to this forum.

[eastcoastopp]

Dec 16, 2018 17:18:44 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

While a team like LSU is much more difficult to see their path.  Their 3 big time players are natural MB - so unless one of them (Bannister) can transition to the pin, they are going to have some waste.

Bannister has been playing opposite for most of her time at LSU. She spent some time at OH this year but hasn't played middle at all.

[bluepenquin]

Dec 16, 2018 18:56:37 GMT -5 eastcoastopp said:

Dec 16, 2018 17:18:44 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

While a team like LSU is much more difficult to see their path.  Their 3 big time players are natural MB - so unless one of them (Bannister) can transition to the pin, they are going to have some waste.

Bannister has been playing opposite for most of her time at LSU. She spent some time at OH this year but hasn't played middle at all.

I had heard she was playing some OH this year - but given the results from LSU I was assuming that this may have not been successful?  RS I can see - by 'natural MB' I was suggesting that MB was the projected recruiting position out of HS.

[ay2013]

Dec 16, 2018 17:18:44 GMT -5 bluepenquin said:

Dec 16, 2018 16:05:14 GMT -5 ay2013 said:

I know TCU is bringing in a stellar recruiting class, but something is off on your methodology when a sweet 16 team that returns everyone is ranked below a team that didn’t even make the tournament.

Also, not sure how much weight you give to senior aces ranking but at some point shouldn’t that just not matter anymore? Taking a small example, Bajema is probably being hurt by her senior aces ranking even though she’s very productive for Washington, meanwhile a player like Abaji at Texas is probably adding with her senior aces ranking even though she has done jack sh*t for 3 years. Or Miller for UCLA. And that’s just off the top of my head. I’m sure here are a number of juniors and seniors who were top 30 recruits years ago that simply have not panned out. Are they getting senior aces bumps for their teams?

That is kind of why I like the 2nd list of the core 8 - so if you have a high senior ace that got injured or didn't pan out, then their score isn't included.  TCU is only #21 on that list compared to #16 for Washington.  Bajema and McCall have the same point value of 8.5 (most for their team).  Those top 10 teams usually have at least a couple players with more than 10 points.

TCU has Buckingham (top 20 SA) who cannot get healthy.  They also have a couple of high Freshman recruits that are likely to be blocked from starting their 1st year.  That said - there should be no mistaking the fact that TCU is putting together some really good talent.  They have 3 more years of McCall and Nails or Adams as Top 20 Freshman as outside hitters.  Unlike some other teams - they are accumulating the much tougher OH recruits.

While a team like LSU is much more difficult to see their path.  Their 3 big time players are natural MB - so unless on of them (Bannister) can transition to the pin, they are going to have some waste.

And then some programs do a much better job of developing players that don't necessarily score high on HS recruit lists.  Hawaii comes to mind - along with several other teams in the West and a team like Pittsburgh this past year.

Well I get TCU is loading up, I’m just questioning the methodology here. Just seems like programs can get essentially unearned points applied to players that have 1- never played in college and still be the relative same value as a proven producer. All conference also negatively impacts middle pac and big teams. Does TCU get 3 players all conference in the pac 12? Oh heck no. I’m just saying that there is something very flawed when a team that was top 25, AVCA, top 25 RPI, top 25 Pablo, sweet 16, loses nobody, gets ranked below a team that didn’t even make the tournament. Those TCU freshmen are fine (and I DO really like Nalls), but it’s not like they have Megan Hodge coming in. It’s a very flawed methodology, whatever it is, especially considering for Washington, their returning opposite, setter, and 3 middles were top 30 recruits.