California Community College Athletic Association

Team Stats

Rk	Team	gp	ab	h	rbi	bb	k	avg	obp	slg
$value 1	Reedley	28	733	195	99	64	115	.266	.335	.359
.359 2	Merced	34	925	266	153	78	132	.288	.353	.385
.385 3	Porterville	37	944	274	181	132	138	.290	.386	.395
.395 4	Coalinga	33	838	248	127	98	140	.296	.378	.364
.364 5	Fresno City	38	1057	350	222	108	126	.331	.397	.469
.469 6	Sequoias	36	990	348	214	103	79	.352	.417	.448
.448 7	Taft	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	2b	3b	hr	xbh
$value 1	Taft	-	-	-	-	0
0 2	Coalinga	33	42	3	3	48
48 3	Reedley	28	37	8	5	50
50 4	Merced	34	47	14	5	66
66 5	Porterville	37	55	4	12	71
71 6	Sequoias	36	60	12	4	76
76 7	Fresno City	38	63	13	19	95

Rk	Team	gp	r	tb	sb	cs
$value 1	Reedley	28	125	263	44	7
7 2	Coalinga	33	151	305	52	5
5 3	Merced	34	170	356	57	6
6 4	Porterville	37	217	373	29	6
6 4	Fresno City	38	247	496	62	9
9 6	Sequoias	36	251	444	59	10
10 7	Taft	-	-	0	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	hbp	sf	sh	hdp	go	fo	go/fo	pa
$value 1	Taft	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	0
0 2	Reedley	28	13	2	18	1	95	109	.87	830
830 3	Coalinga	33	16	6	16	1	38	49	.78	974
974 4	Merced	34	21	9	7	4	129	202	.64	1040
1040 5	Porterville	37	19	7	25	4	83	85	.98	1127
1127 6	Sequoias	36	13	7	41	14	255	155	1.65	1154
1154 7	Fresno City	38	16	14	28	5	78	95	.82	1223

Rk	Team	app	gs	ip	h	r	er	era
$value 1	Taft	-	-	0.0	-	-	-	0.00
0.00 2	Fresno City	38	38	241.1	293	158	113	3.28
3.28 3	Sequoias	36	36	224.1	248	151	111	3.46
3.46 4	Porterville	37	37	223.0	334	219	138	4.33
4.33 5	Merced	34	34	218.0	248	156	136	4.37
4.37 6	Coalinga	33	33	204.2	286	229	139	4.75
4.75 7	Reedley	28	28	167.1	243	202	162	6.78

Rk	Team	app	gs	k	k/7	hr	whip
$value 1	Taft	-	-	-	.00	-	0.00
0.00 2	Fresno City	38	38	90	2.61	8	1.59
1.59 3	Sequoias	36	36	145	4.52	6	1.60
1.60 4	Merced	34	34	155	4.98	8	1.62
1.62 5	Porterville	37	37	77	2.42	3	1.78
1.78 6	Coalinga	33	33	158	5.40	10	1.87
1.87 7	Reedley	28	28	58	2.43	9	2.17

Rk	Team	gp	tc	po	a	e	pb	f%
$value 1	Coalinga	33	882	607	187	88	22	.900
.900 2	Porterville	37	1037	642	317	78	18	.925
.925 3	Reedley	28	629	467	119	43	6	.932
.932 4	Merced	34	932	654	225	53	11	.943
.943 5	Sequoias	36	893	659	186	48	5	.946
.946 6	Fresno City	38	949	684	214	51	5	.946
.946 6	Taft	-	0	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	dp	sba	rcs	rcs%	ci
$value 1	Porterville	37	5	65	0	.000	0
0 2	Reedley	28	4	46	1	.021	0
0 2	Coalinga	33	0	54	2	.036	0
0 2	Merced	34	4	53	4	.070	0
0 2	Sequoias	36	6	57	6	.095	0
0 2	Fresno City	38	10	29	5	.147	0
0 2	Taft	-	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	home games	attend	avg
$value 1	Coalinga	20.0	0	0
0 2	Merced	18.0	0	0
0 2	Porterville	16.0	0	0
0 2	Reedley	14.0	0	0
0 2	Sequoias	22.0	1,050	48
48 6	Fresno City	14.0	-	-
- 7	Taft	-	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	ab	h	rbi	bb	k	avg	obp	slg
$value 1	Reedley	15	410	116	54	37	57	.283	.357	.371
.371 2	Merced	15	426	137	87	42	67	.322	.394	.437
.437 3	Porterville	15	387	106	56	60	61	.274	.379	.377
.377 4	Coalinga	14	349	92	36	40	59	.264	.348	.312
.312 5	Fresno City	15	426	156	109	50	43	.366	.429	.540
.540 6	Sequoias	14	397	135	70	39	33	.340	.403	.416
.416 7	Taft	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	2b	3b	hr	xbh
$value 1	Taft	-	-	-	-	0
0 2	Coalinga	14	12	1	1	14
14 3	Reedley	15	20	5	2	27
27 4	Merced	15	29	7	2	38
38 5	Porterville	15	25	0	5	30
30 6	Sequoias	14	24	0	2	26
26 7	Fresno City	15	30	7	10	47

Rk	Team	gp	r	tb	sb	cs
$value 1	Reedley	15	63	152	20	6
6 2	Coalinga	14	42	109	14	1
1 3	Merced	15	95	186	40	3
3 4	Porterville	15	70	146	7	1
1 5	Fresno City	15	123	230	34	3
3 6	Sequoias	14	100	165	28	3
3 6	Taft	-	-	0	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	hbp	sf	sh	hdp	go	fo	go/fo	pa
$value 1	Taft	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	0
0 2	Reedley	15	11	1	12	0	27	40	.68	471
471 3	Coalinga	14	7	3	11	0	13	15	.87	410
410 4	Merced	15	12	5	2	0	32	76	.42	487
487 5	Porterville	15	7	3	13	1	31	29	1.07	470
470 6	Sequoias	14	4	2	23	3	110	57	1.93	465
465 7	Fresno City	15	6	12	8	0	25	43	.58	502

Rk	Team	app	gs	ip	h	r	er	era
$value 1	Taft	-	-	0.0	-	-	-	0.00
0.00 2	Fresno City	15	15	95.0	106	47	37	2.73
2.73 3	Sequoias	14	14	90.1	92	52	40	3.10
3.10 4	Porterville	15	15	93.0	161	106	70	5.27
5.27 5	Merced	15	15	96.1	116	69	58	4.21
4.21 6	Coalinga	14	14	88.0	135	112	75	5.97
5.97 7	Reedley	15	15	99.0	130	111	86	6.08

Rk	Team	app	gs	k	k/7	hr	whip
$value 1	Taft	-	-	-	.00	-	0.00
0.00 2	Fresno City	15	15	42	3.09	0	1.46
1.46 3	Sequoias	14	14	78	6.04	1	1.55
1.55 4	Merced	15	15	67	4.87	3	1.69
1.69 5	Porterville	15	15	33	2.48	1	2.03
2.03 6	Coalinga	14	14	69	5.49	9	2.06
2.06 7	Reedley	15	15	42	2.97	3	2.02

Rk	Team	gp	tc	po	a	e	pb	f%
$value 1	Coalinga	14	368	264	65	39	7	.894
.894 2	Porterville	15	458	284	139	35	9	.924
.924 3	Reedley	15	364	285	52	27	2	.926
.926 4	Merced	15	405	289	93	23	3	.943
.943 5	Sequoias	14	343	259	62	22	3	.936
.936 6	Fresno City	15	392	283	97	12	2	.969
.969 7	Taft	-	0	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	dp	sba	rcs	rcs%	ci
$value 1	Porterville	15	0	35	0	.000	0
0 2	Reedley	15	1	27	1	.036	0
0 2	Coalinga	14	0	20	0	.000	0
0 2	Merced	15	2	24	3	.111	0
0 2	Sequoias	14	1	28	4	.125	0
0 2	Fresno City	15	3	8	1	.111	0
0 2	Taft	-	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	home games	attend	avg
$value 1	Coalinga	6.0	0	0
0 2	Merced	7.0	0	0
0 2	Porterville	6.0	0	0
0 2	Reedley	9.0	0	0
0 2	Sequoias	9.0	450	50
50 6	Fresno City	6.0	-	-
- 7	Taft	-	-	-