Players

Amir Suarez Senior Outside Hitter (OH)
Player Skills
SERVING	RECEIVING	BLOCKING	ATTACKING	DEFENSE	SETTING
17	16	15	17	16	13

Career Honors

S162nd All-PAC-8

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
5	Albuquerque W (3–1 sets)	4	9	2.25	6	24	.125	6	1	5	0.25	14	.643	1	0.25	1	1.000	11.0	4.12
6	Cincinnati L (0–3 sets)	3	9	3.00	5	22	.182	3	0	3	0.00	8	.625	.	.	.	.	9.0	5.96
7	San Diego W (3–0 sets)	3	3	1.00	4	15	-.067	1	0	1	0.00	8	.875	.	.	.	.	4.5	4.72
9	Dallas W (3–0 sets)	3	9	3.00	3	19	.316	8	1	1	0.33	14	.929	1	0.33	1	1.000	10.5	6.66
10	Tucson L (2–3 sets)	5	13	2.60	7	25	.240	4	1	1	0.20	14	.929	.	.	.	.	15.0	4.54
11	Santa Clara W (3–0 sets)	3	7	2.33	4	13	.231	9	1	2	0.33	14	.857	.	.	.	.	8.5	4.64
14	Mat-Su L (0–3 sets)	3	3	1.00	2	14	.071	0	0	2	0.00	5	.600	0	0.00	1	.000	3.0	2.91
15	Baton Rouge W (3–1 sets)	4	9	2.25	5	25	.160	5	0	3	0.00	13	.769	.	.	.	.	13.0	5.63
17	Pekin W (3–2 sets)	5	24	4.80	7	42	.405	5	1	5	0.20	15	.667	.	.	.	.	26.5	7.16
18	Teutopolis L (2–3 sets)	5	14	2.80	10	34	.118	10	3	2	0.60	19	.895	.	.	.	.	18.5	6.32
21	Cincinnati W (3–2 sets)	5	10	2.00	9	40	.025	5	1	4	0.20	14	.714	1	0.20	1	1.000	12.5	3.31
22	Teutopolis W (3–2 sets)	5	20	4.00	3	35	.486	6	0	2	0.00	16	.875	0	0.00	2	.000	22.5	7.62
25	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	8	2.67	5	17	.176	1	0	1	0.00	8	.875	1	0.33	1	1.000	9.5	5.81
26	Sheboygan L (2–3 sets)	5	28	5.60	8	48	.417	5	0	1	0.00	15	.933	1	0.20	1	1.000	28.5	7.94
29	San Diego L (2–3 sets)	5	16	3.20	9	36	.194	5	2	3	0.40	16	.813	0	0.00	1	.000	19.0	5.66
34	San Jose L (2–3 sets)	5	16	3.20	5	26	.423	4	3	1	0.60	15	.933	0	0.00	1	.000	20.0	4.90
39	Albuquerque L (2–3 sets)	5	6	1.20	7	16	-.063	7	1	1	0.20	18	.944	0	0.00	1	.000	7.0	2.80
44	Mat-Su W (3–0 sets)	3	9	3.00	1	12	.667	10	1	1	0.33	15	.933	.	.	.	.	10.5	7.09
45	Ames L (2–3 sets)	5	11	2.20	4	26	.269	6	1	2	0.20	16	.875	.	.	.	.	14.0	4.20
Total		79	224	2.84	104	489	.245	100	17	41	0.22	257	.840	5	0.06	11	.455	263.0	5.37

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
5	Albuquerque W (3–1 sets)	4	0	2	2	1	0.50	2	0.50	15	1.83	35	7	.800	11.0	4.12
6	Cincinnati L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	2	0.67	20	2.31	32	1	.969	9.0	5.96
7	San Diego W (3–0 sets)	3	1	1	2	0	0.67	7	2.33	17	2.50	26	0	1.000	4.5	4.72
9	Dallas W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	7	2.33	7	2.00	19	1	.947	10.5	6.66
10	Tucson L (2–3 sets)	5	0	2	2	1	0.40	2	0.40	20	2.04	49	5	.898	15.0	4.54
11	Santa Clara W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	5	1.67	7	1.79	19	3	.842	8.5	4.64
14	Mat-Su L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	4	1.33	7	2.12	17	2	.882	3.0	2.91
15	Baton Rouge W (3–1 sets)	4	0	8	8	1	2.00	4	1.00	11	2.14	22	2	.909	13.0	5.63
17	Pekin W (3–2 sets)	5	0	3	3	1	0.60	3	0.60	14	1.97	32	4	.875	26.5	7.16
18	Teutopolis L (2–3 sets)	5	0	3	3	0	0.60	11	2.20	14	2.04	26	4	.846	18.5	6.32
21	Cincinnati W (3–2 sets)	5	0	3	3	0	0.60	4	0.80	10	1.83	36	3	.917	12.5	3.31
22	Teutopolis W (3–2 sets)	5	0	5	5	0	1.00	3	0.60	13	2.07	30	4	.867	22.5	7.62
25	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	1	0.33	16	2.24	33	2	.939	9.5	5.81
26	Sheboygan L (2–3 sets)	5	0	1	1	0	0.20	9	1.80	22	2.11	47	3	.936	28.5	7.94
29	San Diego L (2–3 sets)	5	0	2	2	0	0.40	2	0.40	14	2.00	33	3	.909	19.0	5.66
34	San Jose L (2–3 sets)	5	0	2	2	0	0.40	3	0.60	17	1.81	42	9	.786	20.0	4.90
39	Albuquerque L (2–3 sets)	5	.	.	.	.	.	3	0.60	19	1.95	40	6	.850	7.0	2.80
44	Mat-Su W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	3	1.00	9	2.32	19	0	1.000	10.5	7.09
45	Ames L (2–3 sets)	5	0	4	4	0	0.80	4	0.80	19	1.98	40	6	.850	14.0	4.20
Total		79	1	42	43	4	0.54	79	1.00	271	2.04	597	65	.891	263.0	5.37