California Community College Athletic Association

Team Stats

Rk	Team	m	s	k	k/s	e	ta	pct	a	a/s	pts	pts/s
0.37963272120200336 1	Fresno City	35	112	1586	14.16	449	2995	.380	1462	13.05	2133.5	19.0
0.24544817927170867 2	Sequoias	30	100	1034	10.34	333	2856	.245	923	9.23	1455.5	14.6
0.19830508474576272 3	Reedley	18	69	215	3.12	98	590	.198	198	2.87	323.0	4.7
0.1921246213760277 4	Taft	21	76	795	10.46	351	2311	.192	702	9.24	1051.0	13.8
0.17363813229571984 5	Coalinga	24	87	820	9.43	463	2056	.174	746	8.57	996.0	11.4
0.1282051282051282 6	Porterville	24	91	690	7.58	420	2106	.128	611	6.71	921.5	10.1
0.11770289511153298 7	Merced	19	70	585	8.36	337	2107	.118	506	7.23	784.0	11.2
0.08617424242424243 8	Lemoore	23	85	622	7.32	440	2112	.086	538	6.33	943.0	11.1
-0.016203703703703703 9	Columbia	20	62	165	2.66	179	864	-.016	164	2.65	267.0	4.3

Rk	Team	m	s	digs	d/s	bs	ba	tot	b/s
0.1921246213760277 1	Taft	21	76	1455	19.14	28	86	71	0.93
0.24544817927170867 2	Sequoias	30	100	1413	14.13	178	51	204	2.04
0.37963272120200336 3	Fresno City	35	112	1383	12.35	58	225	171	1.52
0.08617424242424243 4	Lemoore	23	85	934	10.99	38	72	74	0.87
0.1282051282051282 5	Porterville	24	91	867	9.53	42	121	103	1.13
0.11770289511153298 6	Merced	19	70	780	11.14	22	66	55	0.79
0.17363813229571984 7	Coalinga	24	87	765	8.79	5	10	10	0.11
-0.016203703703703703 8	Columbia	20	62	486	7.84	35	16	43	0.69
0.19830508474576272 9	Reedley	18	69	258	3.74	40	46	63	0.91

Rk	Team	m	s	sa	sa/s	r	re
0.37963272120200336 1	Fresno City	35	112	377	3.37	1512	89
0.08617424242424243 2	Lemoore	23	85	247	2.91	1495	200
0.1921246213760277 3	Taft	21	76	185	2.43	371	31
0.24544817927170867 4	Sequoias	30	100	218	2.18	1495	157
0.11770289511153298 5	Merced	19	70	144	2.06	1191	101
0.17363813229571984 6	Coalinga	24	87	166	1.91	0	0
0.1282051282051282 7	Porterville	24	91	129	1.42	145	14
-0.016203703703703703 8	Columbia	20	62	59	0.95	947	135
0.19830508474576272 9	Reedley	18	69	45	0.65	439	115

Rk	Team	m	s	k	k/s	e	ta	pct	a	a/s	pts	pts/s
0.4630113141862489 1	Fresno City	16	48	678	14.13	146	1149	.463	607	12.65	968.5	20.2
0.3088116410670978 2	Sequoias	16	48	531	11.06	149	1237	.309	464	9.67	748.5	15.6
0.21794871794871795 3	Reedley	15	57	127	2.23	59	312	.218	125	2.19	182.5	3.2
0.2044767090139141 4	Taft	16	54	585	10.83	247	1653	.204	521	9.65	783.0	14.5
0.17446808510638298 5	Coalinga	16	56	540	9.64	294	1410	.174	487	8.70	647.0	11.6
0.1267418712674187 6	Porterville	16	57	473	8.30	282	1507	.127	425	7.46	610.0	10.7
0.12183637433784579 7	Merced	15	57	471	8.26	264	1699	.122	415	7.28	624.0	10.9
0.11917098445595854 8	Lemoore	15	58	413	7.12	252	1351	.119	344	5.93	601.5	10.4
-0.062385321100917435 9	Columbia	13	41	90	2.20	124	545	-.062	89	2.17	151.0	3.7

Rk	Team	m	s	digs	d/s	bs	ba	tot	b/s
0.2044767090139141 1	Taft	16	54	1093	20.24	20	68	54	1.00
0.3088116410670978 2	Sequoias	16	48	674	14.04	91	29	106	2.20
0.4630113141862489 3	Fresno City	16	48	588	12.25	17	95	65	1.34
0.11917098445595854 4	Lemoore	15	58	591	10.19	20	37	39	0.66
0.1267418712674187 5	Porterville	16	57	692	12.14	22	84	64	1.12
0.12183637433784579 6	Merced	15	57	644	11.30	17	60	47	0.82
0.17446808510638298 7	Coalinga	16	56	524	9.36	2	0	2	0.04
-0.062385321100917435 8	Columbia	13	41	332	8.10	25	8	29	0.71
0.21794871794871795 9	Reedley	15	57	195	3.42	26	27	40	0.69

Rk	Team	m	s	sa	sa/s	r	re
0.4630113141862489 1	Fresno City	16	48	226	4.71	469	15
0.11917098445595854 2	Lemoore	15	58	150	2.59	985	131
0.2044767090139141 3	Taft	16	54	144	2.67	0	0
0.3088116410670978 4	Sequoias	16	48	112	2.33	632	55
0.12183637433784579 5	Merced	15	57	106	1.86	951	81
0.17446808510638298 6	Coalinga	16	56	105	1.88	0	0
0.1267418712674187 7	Porterville	16	57	73	1.28	57	7
-0.062385321100917435 8	Columbia	13	41	32	0.78	654	104
0.21794871794871795 9	Reedley	15	57	16	0.28	280	81