It's about that time of the year! NCAA Tournament getting going means postseason awards are being doled out by the various conferences.
I'll be the first to admit that statistics shouldn't be the only factor in determining a player's worthiness of these awards, but on my side, that's all I have - so with that context in mind to frame this conversation, let's push forward.
One caveat - who makes these lists is heavily reliant on how you define success. Typically these conference awards are given out to the players who have the largest impact, not necessarily the players who are the best at the things their position requires.
You could make the case that Izzy Ashburn is the best setter because she runs the top offense in the country - or at least half of it. But you could easily make the case that Bergen Reilly, Mac Podraza, or Melani Shaffmaster are the "best" setters because they play the whole game. These lists are nothing more than statistically-derived aggregations. They don't factor in wins/losses, who steps up under the bright lights, and at the end of the day, defense and setting are SUPER hard to distill into a number (and I'd honestly rather not try, but people like lists... so here you go).
Personally, I tried to frame these awards so that Outsides and Opposites are valued for their total contribution as the big point scorers, but for Middles, Liberos, and Setters - they're valued for how well they 'play the position' because I think this is how fans typically, albeit sometimes subconsciously, view these awards.
So with that, here's where we landed.
Big Ten
Pac-12
ACC
Big-12
SEC
Big West
Big East
WCC
Mountain West
