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	Albuquerque L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	2	7	-.286	4	0	3	0.00	11	.727	20	6.67	81	.247	0.5	2.54
5	Tucson L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0.33	0	3	.333	1	1	2	0.33	5	.600	13	4.33	55	.236	2.0	2.08
8	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	0	4	.000	3	0	1	0.00	11	.909	17	5.67	55	.309	1.5	2.92
11	Denali L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0.33	1	2	.000	2	0	1	0.00	6	.833	19	6.33	65	.292	1.5	2.34
13	San Diego L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	2	3	-.667	2	0	1	0.00	6	.833	22	7.33	65	.338	0.5	2.34
14	San Jose L (0–3 sets)	3	3	1.00	1	7	.286	2	0	2	0.00	8	.750	30	10.00	61	.492	3.5	4.84
18	Antioch L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0.33	0	4	.250	2	0	2	0.00	8	.750	24	8.00	70	.343	1.0	3.04
29	Mat-Su L (1–3 sets)	4	2	0.50	1	5	.200	7	0	4	0.00	15	.733	38	9.50	81	.469	2.5	5.15
36	Manitowoc L (1–3 sets)	4	0	0.00	0	5	.000	3	0	2	0.00	12	.833	40	10.00	90	.444	2.0	4.66
39	Tucson L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	0	4	.000	3	0	2	0.00	11	.818	33	11.00	67	.493	0.5	4.64
41	Nashville L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	0	2	.000	6	1	2	0.33	14	.857	34	11.33	72	.472	2.0	7.37
Total		35	8	0.23	7	46	.022	35	2	22	0.06	107	.794	290	8.29	762	.381	17.5	3.81

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 L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	0.5	2.54
5	Tucson L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	5	1.67	.	.	.	.	.	2.0	2.08
8	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	1.5	2.92
11	Denali L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	1	0.33	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	1.5	2.34
13	San Diego L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	0.5	2.34
14	San Jose L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	3.5	4.84
18	Antioch L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	1.0	3.04
29	Mat-Su L (1–3 sets)	4	0	1	1	0	0.25	2	0.50	.	.	.	.	.	2.5	5.15
36	Manitowoc L (1–3 sets)	4	1	2	3	1	0.75	2	0.50	.	.	.	.	.	2.0	4.66
39	Tucson L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	0.5	4.64
41	Nashville L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	1	0.67	8	2.67	.	.	.	.	.	2.0	7.37
Total		35	1	13	14	4	0.40	25	0.71	.	.	.	.	.	17.5	3.81