Players

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
1	Baton Rouge W (3–0 sets)	3	16	5.33	1	22	.682	6	1	2	0.33	12	.833	.	.	.	.	19.0	9.83
3	Denali W (3–2 sets)	5	18	3.60	4	32	.438	4	0	2	0.00	13	.846	.	.	.	.	19.0	7.36
5	Nashville L (0–3 sets)	3	7	2.33	5	19	.105	5	1	0	0.33	12	1.000	1	0.33	1	1.000	9.0	6.27
6	Dallas W (3–2 sets)	5	16	3.20	7	34	.265	2	0	5	0.00	14	.643	0	0.00	1	.000	17.5	7.34
7	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	10	3.33	6	20	.200	2	1	0	0.33	8	1.000	1	0.33	1	1.000	11.0	5.67
9	Cincinnati L (0–3 sets)	3	7	2.33	3	11	.364	2	0	5	0.00	8	.375	.	.	.	.	7.0	4.91
10	Baton Rouge W (3–2 sets)	5	11	2.20	5	25	.240	8	1	3	0.20	18	.833	.	.	.	.	14.0	5.64
12	San Jose L (2–3 sets)	5	20	4.00	3	30	.567	7	0	2	0.00	19	.895	.	.	.	.	22.0	8.00
13	Kentucky W (3–0 sets)	3	8	2.67	4	20	.200	4	0	1	0.00	10	.900	1	0.33	1	1.000	9.5	7.10
15	Albuquerque W (3–0 sets)	3	6	2.00	2	15	.267	6	0	2	0.00	10	.800	.	.	.	.	8.5	5.01
17	Spokane W (3–1 sets)	4	13	3.25	1	20	.600	4	0	2	0.00	14	.857	0	0.00	1	.000	14.0	5.84
19	Nashville L (1–3 sets)	4	8	2.00	11	22	-.136	8	1	3	0.25	15	.800	.	.	.	.	11.5	4.61
22	Mat-Su L (0–3 sets)	3	13	4.33	2	22	.500	2	1	0	0.33	10	1.000	.	.	.	.	14.5	7.61
25	Mendon W (3–0 sets)	3	4	1.33	2	9	.222	5	1	0	0.33	11	1.000	.	.	.	.	8.5	4.96
29	Teutopolis L (1–3 sets)	4	9	2.25	4	18	.278	3	0	3	0.00	14	.786	.	.	.	.	9.0	4.11
31	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	15	3.75	11	28	.143	4	0	4	0.00	12	.667	.	.	.	.	17.5	7.16
34	Antioch L (2–3 sets)	5	13	2.60	5	25	.320	9	1	3	0.20	21	.857	.	.	.	.	15.0	6.28
39	Nashville L (0–3 sets)	3	10	3.33	4	21	.286	5	1	1	0.33	12	.917	.	.	.	.	11.0	7.18
46	Nashville L (1–3 sets)	4	6	1.50	10	25	-.160	7	1	3	0.25	16	.813	.	.	.	.	8.0	4.80
Total		72	210	2.92	90	418	.287	93	10	41	0.14	249	.835	3	0.04	5	.600	245.5	6.30

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
1	Baton Rouge W (3–0 sets)	3	0	4	4	1	1.33	6	2.00	8	2.42	12	0	1.000	19.0	9.83
3	Denali W (3–2 sets)	5	0	2	2	0	0.40	5	1.00	13	2.45	20	0	1.000	19.0	7.36
5	Nashville L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	1	0.67	3	1.00	11	2.57	14	1	.929	9.0	6.27
6	Dallas W (3–2 sets)	5	0	3	3	2	0.60	14	2.80	19	2.45	31	0	1.000	17.5	7.34
7	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	8	2.25	16	0	1.000	11.0	5.67
9	Cincinnati L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	1	0.33	9	2.58	12	1	.917	7.0	4.91
10	Baton Rouge W (3–2 sets)	5	0	4	4	0	0.80	9	1.80	9	2.24	17	0	1.000	14.0	5.64
12	San Jose L (2–3 sets)	5	1	2	3	0	0.60	4	0.80	15	2.33	27	1	.963	22.0	8.00
13	Kentucky W (3–0 sets)	3	0	3	3	1	1.00	4	1.33	5	2.43	7	0	1.000	9.5	7.10
15	Albuquerque W (3–0 sets)	3	0	5	5	1	1.67	3	1.00	5	2.09	11	0	1.000	8.5	5.01
17	Spokane W (3–1 sets)	4	0	2	2	1	0.50	3	0.75	14	1.97	29	3	.897	14.0	5.84
19	Nashville L (1–3 sets)	4	0	5	5	0	1.25	2	0.50	13	2.14	29	3	.897	11.5	4.61
22	Mat-Su L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	2	0.67	17	2.36	25	2	.920	14.5	7.61
25	Mendon W (3–0 sets)	3	0	7	7	0	2.33	2	0.67	8	2.25	16	0	1.000	8.5	4.96
29	Teutopolis L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	5	1.25	12	2.04	23	1	.957	9.0	4.11
31	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	0	5	5	0	1.25	3	0.75	13	2.07	27	3	.889	17.5	7.16
34	Antioch L (2–3 sets)	5	0	2	2	0	0.40	7	1.40	16	2.40	25	1	.960	15.0	6.28
39	Nashville L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	5	1.67	8	2.38	13	0	1.000	11.0	7.18
46	Nashville L (1–3 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	6	1.50	15	2.38	24	1	.958	8.0	4.80
Total		72	1	49	50	8	0.69	84	1.17	218	2.28	378	17	.955	245.5	6.30