Players

Alex McConvey 5 Setter (S)
Player Skills
SERVING	RECEIVING	BLOCKING	ATTACKING	DEFENSE	SETTING
17	-	17	13	16	18

Season 10 Totals
ASSISTS	KILLS	ACES	DIGS	BLOCKS
955 16th	45 287th	31 35th	83 108th	43 180th

Career Honors

S92nd All-SEC

S102nd All-SEC

Match Statistics - OFFENSE (Season 10)

Match		Sets	Attack					Serve						Set
m	opponent/sets	sp	k	k/s	e	ta	pct	pts	sa	se	sa/s	ta	pct	a	a/s	ta	pct	pts	rating
4	Nashville W (3–1 sets)	4	4	1.00	0	6	.667	8	0	3	0.00	18	.833	38	9.50	71	.535	5.0	6.06
6	St. Charles W (3–1 sets)	4	3	0.75	0	11	.273	2	0	4	0.00	14	.714	54	13.50	109	.495	4.0	8.58
8	Baton Rouge L (2–3 sets)	5	1	0.20	1	7	.000	12	4	2	0.80	26	.923	52	10.40	83	.627	5.5	5.76
9	Schenectady L (1–3 sets)	4	2	0.50	0	3	.667	11	2	0	0.50	21	1.000	37	9.25	88	.420	4.5	5.65
11	Merritt Island W (3–0 sets)	3	0	0.00	0	1	.000	8	1	0	0.33	16	1.000	41	13.67	55	.745	1.5	8.84
12	Spokane L (1–3 sets)	4	2	0.50	0	3	.667	10	1	0	0.25	22	1.000	50	12.50	82	.610	3.0	7.83
13	Nashville W (3–0 sets)	3	1	0.33	0	3	.333	3	2	2	0.67	12	.833	35	11.67	61	.574	5.0	7.82
15	Denali L (2–3 sets)	5	3	0.60	2	12	.083	9	2	2	0.40	23	.913	54	10.80	100	.540	5.0	5.43
17	Cincinnati W (3–0 sets)	3	3	1.00	0	4	.750	2	0	2	0.00	9	.778	36	12.00	52	.692	4.0	7.12
19	Kentucky W (3–0 sets)	3	1	0.33	0	7	.143	7	1	1	0.33	14	.929	42	14.00	60	.700	2.5	9.06
22	Quincy W (3–0 sets)	3	4	1.33	2	9	.222	9	0	2	0.00	18	.889	32	10.67	51	.627	4.5	6.95
23	Starkville W (3–0 sets)	3	2	0.67	0	2	1.000	9	0	1	0.00	17	.941	38	12.67	53	.717	3.5	9.71
26	Pekin W (3–0 sets)	3	2	0.67	0	2	1.000	4	1	4	0.33	14	.714	35	11.67	63	.556	4.5	7.98
27	Baton Rouge L (1–3 sets)	4	1	0.25	0	4	.250	4	3	0	0.75	16	1.000	48	12.00	80	.600	4.0	6.46
30	Alton L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0.33	2	3	-.333	10	0	3	0.00	20	.850	45	15.00	78	.577	1.5	9.78
32	Tucson L (1–3 sets)	4	2	0.50	0	7	.286	7	2	2	0.50	18	.889	50	12.50	86	.581	6.0	9.01
34	Baton Rouge W (3–1 sets)	4	4	1.00	0	6	.667	8	2	3	0.50	19	.842	53	13.25	80	.663	8.5	9.84
35	Tucson W (3–0 sets)	3	1	0.33	1	4	.000	6	0	2	0.00	14	.857	46	15.33	64	.719	3.0	10.00
39	Teutopolis W (3–0 sets)	3	1	0.33	0	4	.250	14	5	2	1.67	22	.909	38	12.67	56	.679	6.0	8.15
40	Denali W (3–1 sets)	4	4	1.00	0	5	.800	5	1	2	0.25	16	.875	44	11.00	78	.564	8.0	6.81
44	Starkville W (3–0 sets)	3	1	0.33	0	3	.333	12	3	0	1.00	20	1.000	38	12.67	61	.623	5.5	9.73
45	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	2	0.50	0	7	.286	2	1	1	0.25	15	.933	49	12.25	74	.662	3.5	6.78
Total		79	45	0.57	8	113	.327	162	31	38	0.39	384	.901	955	12.09	1585	.603	98.5	7.88

Match Statistics - DEFENSE (Season 10)

Match		Sets	Block					Dig		Receive
m	opponent/sets	sp	s	a	t	be	blk/s	d	d/s	3	rt	rcv	e	pct	pts	rating
4	Nashville W (3–1 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	3	0.75	.	.	.	.	.	5.0	6.06
6	St. Charles W (3–1 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	4	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	4.0	8.58
8	Baton Rouge L (2–3 sets)	5	0	1	1	0	0.20	4	0.80	.	.	.	.	.	5.5	5.76
9	Schenectady L (1–3 sets)	4	0	1	1	0	0.25	10	2.50	.	.	.	.	.	4.5	5.65
11	Merritt Island W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	4	1.33	.	.	.	.	.	1.5	8.84
12	Spokane L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	3	0.75	.	.	.	.	.	3.0	7.83
13	Nashville W (3–0 sets)	3	0	4	4	1	1.33	5	1.67	.	.	.	.	.	5.0	7.82
15	Denali L (2–3 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	2	0.40	.	.	.	.	.	5.0	5.43
17	Cincinnati W (3–0 sets)	3	1	0	1	0	0.33	3	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	4.0	7.12
19	Kentucky W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	2.5	9.06
22	Quincy W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	4	1.33	.	.	.	.	.	4.5	6.95
23	Starkville W (3–0 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	3	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	3.5	9.71
26	Pekin W (3–0 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	4	1.33	.	.	.	.	.	4.5	7.98
27	Baton Rouge L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	5	1.25	.	.	.	.	.	4.0	6.46
30	Alton L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	5	1.67	.	.	.	.	.	1.5	9.78
32	Tucson L (1–3 sets)	4	0	4	4	1	1.00	5	1.25	.	.	.	.	.	6.0	9.01
34	Baton Rouge W (3–1 sets)	4	1	3	4	0	1.00	3	0.75	.	.	.	.	.	8.5	9.84
35	Tucson W (3–0 sets)	3	0	4	4	0	1.33	3	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	3.0	10.00
39	Teutopolis W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	6.0	8.15
40	Denali W (3–1 sets)	4	0	6	6	0	1.50	2	0.50	.	.	.	.	.	8.0	6.81
44	Starkville W (3–0 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	4	1.33	.	.	.	.	.	5.5	9.73
45	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	0	1	1	0	0.25	3	0.75	.	.	.	.	.	3.5	6.78
Total		79	2	41	43	3	0.54	83	1.05	.	.	.	.	.	98.5	7.88