I think this is difficult because you have disparate positions - how can you tell if a setter had a good week compared to a libero, for instance?

I might use a system where I rank players each week in each different skill - Attack, Set, Serve, Receive, Dig, Block. Give the best player in each category 100, second best 90, third best 80, and then 4th best 75, from there decrease by one down to zero (so 5=74, 6=73, 7=72, if my math is right 78=1.) So a theoretical player who is 1st in Attack, 30th in set, and 50th in serve would receive 100+(75-30+4)+(75-50+4) = 100+49+29 = 178 points as an offense score.

You would then rank this list in descending order. The player with the top score wins the award! I don't know enough about the statistics yet to identify potentially disqualifying problems here, though.

I like the idea of breaking this out by conference and having a first, second, third and giving extra CP/RP to those teams (with more of a bonus for first place, maybe 5-2-1 or 8-3-1.)

Thanks JH!

Just throwing something out there. Each of the 6 skill sets were chosen for a reason, each having an important role to play on the court. Three on offense (Srv, Att, Set), three on defense (Rcv, Blk, Def). The system could be as simple as:

 * Each time one of the offensive/defensive skills are checked during the match, if the check succeeds, add X to that player's Offensive/Defensive POW score. If it fails, subtract Y.

 * If a player's involvement directly leads to an offensive point, add X. to the OPOW.

 * If a player's involvement directly leads to a defensive point, subtract X from the DPOW.

That would work, but you'd probably have to divide it by the number of sets. A super efficient outside blocker who gets a clean sweep of a good team might lose out to a player who racks up the points in a five game set which goes to the tiebreak.

That's a good idea.