Players

Freddy Parks 5 Middle Blocker (MB)
Player Skills
SERVING	RECEIVING	BLOCKING	ATTACKING	DEFENSE	SETTING
11	-	14	13	7	-

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	Teutopolis W (3–0 sets)	3	3	1.00	5	13	-.154	6	1	2	0.33	13	.846	.	.	.	.	5.0	4.81
3	Pekin L (1–3 sets)	4	4	1.00	1	7	.429	6	0	3	0.00	15	.800	.	.	.	.	5.0	4.11
5	Schenectady L (0–3 sets)	3	3	1.00	0	7	.429	3	0	1	0.00	10	.900	.	.	.	.	5.0	5.98
7	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	7	2.33	3	13	.308	1	1	0	0.33	7	1.000	.	.	.	.	9.0	5.67
8	Santa Clara L (0–3 sets)	3	0	0.00	4	7	-.571	2	0	1	0.00	9	.889	.	.	.	.	1.0	3.52
10	New Orleans L (1–3 sets)	4	9	2.25	5	17	.235	2	0	2	0.00	11	.818	.	.	.	.	10.5	5.55
11	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	7	1.75	2	11	.455	7	0	3	0.00	18	.833	.	.	.	.	8.5	5.47
13	Carlsbad W (3–1 sets)	4	11	2.75	4	20	.350	6	0	4	0.00	14	.714	.	.	.	.	14.0	8.62
16	Sheboygan L (0–3 sets)	3	3	1.00	3	8	.000	3	1	2	0.33	10	.800	.	.	.	.	4.5	3.34
18	San Diego L (1–3 sets)	4	5	1.25	9	19	-.211	5	0	1	0.00	12	.917	.	.	.	.	6.0	4.35
20	Baton Rouge L (2–3 sets)	5	6	1.20	3	14	.214	9	0	1	0.00	16	.938	.	.	.	.	9.5	6.55
22	Schenectady L (1–3 sets)	4	6	1.50	4	13	.154	4	0	4	0.00	12	.667	.	.	.	.	8.5	6.34
25	New Orleans W (3–0 sets)	3	6	2.00	3	13	.231	8	1	1	0.33	16	.938	.	.	.	.	7.5	5.73
28	Burlington L (2–3 sets)	5	7	1.40	5	17	.118	1	0	1	0.00	12	.917	.	.	.	.	10.0	5.70
29	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0.33	3	5	-.400	2	0	1	0.00	9	.889	.	.	.	.	1.5	2.69
33	Antioch L (1–3 sets)	4	7	1.75	4	17	.176	1	0	1	0.00	10	.900	.	.	.	.	8.5	4.97
35	Antioch L (0–3 sets)	3	5	1.67	3	8	.250	0	0	1	0.00	5	.800	.	.	.	.	6.5	4.32
36	Mendon W (3–0 sets)	3	5	1.67	2	8	.375	6	1	4	0.33	12	.667	.	.	.	.	9.0	8.56
38	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	10	2.50	4	17	.353	4	0	4	0.00	14	.714	.	.	.	.	11.5	6.66
41	Quincy L (0–3 sets)	3	4	1.33	2	8	.250	1	0	2	0.00	7	.714	.	.	.	.	6.0	6.08
43	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	6	2.00	0	8	.750	2	0	3	0.00	10	.700	.	.	.	.	10.0	8.59
Total		75	115	1.53	69	250	.184	79	5	42	0.07	242	.826	.	.	.	.	157.0	5.60

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	Teutopolis W (3–0 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	5.0	4.81
3	Pekin L (1–3 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	3	0.75	.	.	.	.	.	5.0	4.11
5	Schenectady L (0–3 sets)	3	0	4	4	0	1.33	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	5.0	5.98
7	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	9.0	5.67
8	Santa Clara L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	1.0	3.52
10	New Orleans L (1–3 sets)	4	1	1	2	0	0.50	5	1.25	.	.	.	.	.	10.5	5.55
11	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	1	1	2	2	0.50	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	8.5	5.47
13	Carlsbad W (3–1 sets)	4	1	4	5	1	1.25	2	0.50	.	.	.	.	.	14.0	8.62
16	Sheboygan L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	4.5	3.34
18	San Diego L (1–3 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	2	0.50	.	.	.	.	.	6.0	4.35
20	Baton Rouge L (2–3 sets)	5	1	5	6	0	1.20	5	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	9.5	6.55
22	Schenectady L (1–3 sets)	4	1	3	4	0	1.00	2	0.50	.	.	.	.	.	8.5	6.34
25	New Orleans W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	7.5	5.73
28	Burlington L (2–3 sets)	5	0	6	6	0	1.20	2	0.40	.	.	.	.	.	10.0	5.70
29	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	1.5	2.69
33	Antioch L (1–3 sets)	4	0	3	3	0	0.75	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	8.5	4.97
35	Antioch L (0–3 sets)	3	1	1	2	0	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	6.5	4.32
36	Mendon W (3–0 sets)	3	0	6	6	0	2.00	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	9.0	8.56
38	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	0	3	3	1	0.75	4	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	11.5	6.66
41	Quincy L (0–3 sets)	3	0	4	4	0	1.33	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	6.0	6.08
43	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	2	4	6	0	2.00	3	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	10.0	8.59
Total		75	8	58	66	4	0.88	36	0.48	.	.	.	.	.	157.0	5.60