Players

Isaac Scott Junior Right Side (RS)
Player Skills
SERVING	RECEIVING	BLOCKING	ATTACKING	DEFENSE	SETTING
10	-	15	14	12	-

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
4	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	15	5.00	5	28	.357	6	1	3	0.33	13	.769	.	.	.	.	16.0	7.51
7	Dallas W (3–0 sets)	3	2	0.67	0	4	.500	5	1	2	0.33	11	.818	.	.	.	.	5.5	6.07
9	Mat-Su L (1–3 sets)	4	4	1.00	0	10	.400	1	0	2	0.00	10	.800	.	.	.	.	5.5	4.34
12	Albuquerque L (0–3 sets)	3	9	3.00	5	22	.182	3	1	3	0.33	9	.667	.	.	.	.	10.0	4.26
13	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	6	2.00	2	13	.308	4	2	3	0.67	11	.727	.	.	.	.	8.0	4.20
15	Schenectady W (3–0 sets)	3	9	3.00	0	13	.692	4	1	2	0.33	11	.818	.	.	.	.	11.5	7.98
17	San Diego W (3–2 sets)	5	7	1.40	6	16	.063	4	0	1	0.00	15	.933	.	.	.	.	9.5	6.71
18	Manitowoc W (3–0 sets)	3	3	1.00	2	5	.200	1	0	3	0.00	6	.500	.	.	.	.	4.5	4.74
25	Santa Clara W (3–1 sets)	4	10	2.50	2	22	.364	3	0	2	0.00	13	.846	.	.	.	.	11.0	5.72
26	Kentucky W (3–0 sets)	3	9	3.00	1	14	.571	3	0	3	0.00	8	.625	.	.	.	.	11.5	8.19
29	Dallas W (3–1 sets)	4	6	1.50	1	12	.417	4	0	6	0.00	13	.538	.	.	.	.	6.0	4.44
30	Tucson W (3–0 sets)	3	0	0.00	1	5	-.200	8	1	2	0.33	15	.867	.	.	.	.	1.5	3.97
34	Portland L (1–3 sets)	4	17	4.25	6	29	.379	0	0	3	0.00	9	.667	.	.	.	.	17.5	5.37
39	Ames W (3–0 sets)	3	1	0.33	1	2	.000	5	0	1	0.00	11	.909	.	.	.	.	3.0	5.57
40	Cincinnati L (2–3 sets)	5	5	1.00	0	6	.833	4	1	5	0.20	18	.722	.	.	.	.	8.5	5.36
44	Pekin L (2–3 sets)	5	4	0.80	0	8	.500	7	1	3	0.20	18	.833	.	.	.	.	5.5	4.47
45	Teutopolis W (3–2 sets)	5	10	2.00	0	12	.833	4	0	1	0.00	16	.938	.	.	.	.	13.0	6.80
Total		63	117	1.86	32	221	.385	66	9	45	0.14	207	.783	.	.	.	.	148.0	5.63

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
4	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	6	2.00	.	.	.	.	.	16.0	7.51
7	Dallas W (3–0 sets)	3	2	1	3	0	1.00	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	5.5	6.07
9	Mat-Su L (1–3 sets)	4	0	3	3	0	0.75	1	0.25	.	.	.	.	.	5.5	4.34
12	Albuquerque L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	10.0	4.26
13	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	3	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	8.0	4.20
15	Schenectady W (3–0 sets)	3	0	3	3	1	1.00	3	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	11.5	7.98
17	San Diego W (3–2 sets)	5	0	5	5	0	1.00	8	1.60	.	.	.	.	.	9.5	6.71
18	Manitowoc W (3–0 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	4.5	4.74
25	Santa Clara W (3–1 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	4	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	11.0	5.72
26	Kentucky W (3–0 sets)	3	1	3	4	0	1.33	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	11.5	8.19
29	Dallas W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	7	1.75	.	.	.	.	.	6.0	4.44
30	Tucson W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	2	0.67	.	.	.	.	.	1.5	3.97
34	Portland L (1–3 sets)	4	0	1	1	0	0.25	1	0.25	.	.	.	.	.	17.5	5.37
39	Ames W (3–0 sets)	3	1	2	3	0	1.00	1	0.33	.	.	.	.	.	3.0	5.57
40	Cincinnati L (2–3 sets)	5	1	3	4	1	0.80	5	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	8.5	5.36
44	Pekin L (2–3 sets)	5	0	1	1	0	0.20	7	1.40	.	.	.	.	.	5.5	4.47
45	Teutopolis W (3–2 sets)	5	1	4	5	0	1.00	5	1.00	.	.	.	.	.	13.0	6.80
Total		63	6	32	38	2	0.60	57	0.90	.	.	.	.	.	148.0	5.63