Players

Session 13 Coaches Poll deadline in 9 hours and 23 minutes

MSWL UNITED MSWL U2 TMVL
Wednesday, April 29th, 2026 - 08:36:40 AM (gmt)

TMVL Season 17 // Landing

Logo

Donate ELO Ranking Honor Roll NET Ranking Stats Leaders Teams Of The Week Wall

If you'd like to join please click this link and add your name to the waitlist.

PAC 8 Conference

SEC Conference

BIG 8 Conference

Big East Conference

Guy Fleegman 5 Libero (L)
Player Skills
SERVING	RECEIVING	BLOCKING	ATTACKING	DEFENSE	SETTING
16	18	-	-	17	16

Season 11 Totals
DIGS	RCV RT	RCV PCT	ASSISTS	ACES
96 60th	2.26 56th	.941 50th	63 99th	10 236th

Career Honors

S131st All-TMVL1st All-PAC-8

S142nd All-PAC-8

Match Statistics - OFFENSE (Season 11)

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	Albuquerque W (3–2 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	1	1	3	0.20	9	.667	11	2.20	20	.550	1.0	3.83
2	San Jose L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	7	2	3	0.50	16	.813	4	1.00	5	.800	2.0	4.43
8	Santa Clara L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	2	0	4	0.00	11	.636	2	0.67	4	.500	0.0	8.36
10	Albuquerque L (2–3 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	5	0	3	0.00	15	.800	3	0.60	12	.250	0.0	8.03
15	Nashville W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	5	1	1	0.25	12	.917	4	1.00	11	.364	1.0	7.31
17	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	0	0	0	0.00	5	1.000	3	1.00	6	.500	0.0	6.30
21	Sheboygan L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	9	0	4	0.00	19	.789	6	1.50	13	.462	0.0	8.21
29	Carlsbad W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	9	3	2	1.00	14	.857	3	1.00	6	.500	3.0	5.44
34	Santa Clara W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	6	0	1	0.00	14	.929	8	2.67	12	.667	0.0	9.36
39	Tucson W (3–2 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	6	0	4	0.00	20	.800	7	1.40	12	.583	0.0	5.80
40	Nashville L (2–3 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	12	1	4	0.20	26	.846	3	0.60	11	.273	1.0	5.75
44	San Diego W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	4	0	1	0.00	15	.933	6	1.50	11	.545	0.0	3.96
45	Tucson W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	5	2	4	0.50	16	.750	3	0.75	7	.429	2.0	8.16
Total		52	.	.	.	.	.	71	10	34	0.19	192	.823	63	1.21	130	.485	10.0	6.53

Match Statistics - DEFENSE (Season 11)

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	Albuquerque W (3–2 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	5	1.00	13	2.03	31	4	.871	1.0	3.83
2	San Jose L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	5	1.25	14	2.06	32	2	.938	2.0	4.43
8	Santa Clara L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	7	2.33	11	2.63	16	0	1.000	0.0	8.36
10	Albuquerque L (2–3 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	14	2.80	20	2.40	35	1	.971	0.0	8.03
15	Nashville W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	11	2.75	10	2.32	19	1	.947	1.0	7.31
17	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	4	1.33	15	2.43	23	1	.957	0.0	6.30
21	Sheboygan L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	7	1.75	11	2.60	15	0	1.000	0.0	8.21
29	Carlsbad W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	4	1.33	10	2.14	22	1	.955	3.0	5.44
34	Santa Clara W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	9	3.00	4	2.50	8	0	1.000	0.0	9.36
39	Tucson W (3–2 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	8	1.60	16	2.11	38	2	.947	0.0	5.80
40	Nashville L (2–3 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	10	2.00	14	2.06	32	3	.906	1.0	5.75
44	San Diego W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	3	0.75	14	2.21	29	3	.897	0.0	3.96
45	Tucson W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	9	2.25	15	2.55	22	1	.955	2.0	8.16
Total		52	.	.	.	.	.	96	1.85	167	2.26	322	19	.941	10.0	6.53