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	New Orleans L (1–3 sets)	4	2	0.50	0	6	.333	4	1	2	0.25	10	.800	29	7.25	92	.315	5.5	4.20
5	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0.33	0	4	.250	5	1	1	0.33	13	.923	37	12.33	80	.463	3.0	8.10
13	Starkville W (3–1 sets)	4	2	0.50	1	9	.111	3	0	3	0.00	15	.800	43	10.75	80	.538	5.0	6.87
14	Antioch L (1–3 sets)	4	3	0.75	4	12	-.083	10	3	1	0.75	21	.952	42	10.50	77	.545	6.0	5.89
18	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	2	0.67	0	4	.500	1	0	1	0.00	8	.875	24	8.00	72	.333	2.0	3.04
19	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	0	2	.000	4	1	2	0.33	11	.818	24	8.00	66	.364	1.0	3.24
21	Quincy L (1–3 sets)	4	0	0.00	0	2	.000	7	2	3	0.50	18	.833	41	10.25	85	.482	4.0	6.01
22	Tucson L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	0	3	.000	4	0	2	0.00	12	.833	39	13.00	79	.494	0.5	7.54
25	Manitowoc W (3–0 sets)	3	1	0.33	1	4	.000	10	5	2	1.67	17	.882	35	11.67	66	.530	7.5	8.54
26	Ames W (3–0 sets)	3	1	0.33	0	3	.333	2	1	2	0.33	9	.778	32	10.67	57	.561	3.5	6.30
29	Baton Rouge L (1–3 sets)	4	0	0.00	1	3	-.333	2	0	1	0.00	12	.917	30	7.50	83	.361	0.0	2.98
33	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0.33	0	3	.333	3	1	1	0.33	11	.909	29	9.67	79	.367	2.5	5.04
34	Nashville L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0.33	1	3	.000	2	0	2	0.00	10	.800	36	12.00	62	.581	1.0	6.28
36	New Orleans W (3–1 sets)	4	1	0.25	0	2	.500	10	2	6	0.50	21	.714	56	14.00	101	.554	6.0	10.00
39	Teutopolis L (1–3 sets)	4	3	0.75	0	11	.273	6	1	3	0.25	17	.824	47	11.75	78	.603	5.0	7.22
41	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	4	1.00	2	7	.286	4	0	0	0.00	13	1.000	47	11.75	93	.505	4.5	6.84
46	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	0	2	.000	1	0	0	0.00	8	1.000	34	11.33	67	.507	1.5	6.11
Total		59	22	0.37	10	80	.150	78	18	32	0.31	226	.858	625	10.59	1317	.475	58.5	6.13

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	New Orleans L (1–3 sets)	4	1	3	4	0	1.00	4	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	5.5	4.20
5	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0	1	0	0.33	5	1.67	.	.	.	.	.	3.0	8.10
13	Starkville W (3–1 sets)	4	0	6	6	0	1.50	8	2.00	.	.	.	.	.	5.0	6.87
14	Antioch L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	2	0.50	.	.	.	.	.	6.0	5.89
18	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	2.0	3.04
19	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	4	1.33	.	.	.	.	.	1.0	3.24
21	Quincy L (1–3 sets)	4	1	2	3	0	0.75	3	0.75	.	.	.	.	.	4.0	6.01
22	Tucson L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	0.5	7.54
25	Manitowoc W (3–0 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	4	1.33	.	.	.	.	.	7.5	8.54
26	Ames W (3–0 sets)	3	0	3	3	1	1.00	4	1.33	.	.	.	.	.	3.5	6.30
29	Baton Rouge L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	7	1.75	.	.	.	.	.	0.0	2.98
33	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	4	1.33	.	.	.	.	.	2.5	5.04
34	Nashville L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	3	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	1.0	6.28
36	New Orleans W (3–1 sets)	4	0	6	6	2	1.50	13	3.25	.	.	.	.	.	6.0	10.00
39	Teutopolis L (1–3 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	2	0.50	.	.	.	.	.	5.0	7.22
41	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	0	1	1	1	0.25	4	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	4.5	6.84
46	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	1	1	2	0	0.67	4	1.33	.	.	.	.	.	1.5	6.11
Total		59	4	29	33	5	0.56	75	1.27	.	.	.	.	.	58.5	6.13