Players

Lucas Mejia 5 Outside Hitter (OH)
Player Skills
SERVING	RECEIVING	BLOCKING	ATTACKING	DEFENSE	SETTING
14	12	14	12	13	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
1	Burlington L (0–3 sets)	3	7	2.33	7	19	.000	3	0	0	0.00	10	1.000	0	0.00	1	.000	7.0	5.26
2	Schenectady L (2–3 sets)	5	8	1.60	10	30	-.067	7	1	2	0.20	19	.895	0	0.00	1	.000	9.5	3.76
5	Sheboygan L (0–3 sets)	3	9	3.00	3	25	.240	4	0	2	0.00	14	.857	1	0.33	1	1.000	10.0	7.11
7	Albuquerque L (0–3 sets)	3	10	3.33	2	18	.444	4	0	3	0.00	10	.700	1	0.33	1	1.000	11.5	7.62
8	Albuquerque W (3–1 sets)	4	6	1.50	6	21	.000	13	3	1	0.75	19	.947	0	0.00	1	.000	10.0	5.19
9	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	3	1.00	6	21	-.143	3	1	0	0.33	9	1.000	0	0.00	5	.000	5.5	3.15
11	Burlington L (2–3 sets)	5	9	1.80	3	23	.261	5	0	2	0.00	16	.875	.	.	.	.	11.0	5.48
13	New Orleans L (0–3 sets)	3	4	1.33	3	12	.083	2	0	2	0.00	12	.833	.	.	.	.	4.0	2.68
16	Pekin W (3–0 sets)	3	9	3.00	5	24	.167	6	0	2	0.00	13	.846	.	.	.	.	10.5	7.66
17	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	6	2.00	5	15	.067	3	0	2	0.00	12	.833	0	0.00	2	.000	7.5	4.69
20	Albuquerque L (1–3 sets)	4	6	1.50	5	26	.038	4	1	0	0.25	11	1.000	2	0.50	1	2.000	9.0	4.15
22	Schenectady L (0–3 sets)	3	4	1.33	5	16	-.063	3	2	0	0.67	11	1.000	.	.	.	.	7.0	4.04
25	Antioch L (1–3 sets)	4	14	3.50	3	24	.458	4	1	2	0.25	11	.818	.	.	.	.	16.0	6.37
28	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	5	1.67	2	17	.176	0	0	0	0.00	6	1.000	.	.	.	.	5.0	1.58
32	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	5	1.67	1	10	.400	0	0	0	0.00	7	1.000	.	.	.	.	5.5	2.05
35	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	6	1.50	2	19	.211	2	0	2	0.00	14	.857	1	0.25	1	1.000	6.5	2.89
Total		56	111	1.98	68	320	.134	63	9	20	0.16	194	.897	9	0.16	14	.643	135.5	4.61

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	Burlington L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	6	2.00	15	2.33	24	2	.917	7.0	5.26
2	Schenectady L (2–3 sets)	5	0	1	1	0	0.20	6	1.20	16	2.08	39	4	.897	9.5	3.76
5	Sheboygan L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	3	0.67	7	2.33	19	2.22	36	3	.917	10.0	7.11
7	Albuquerque L (0–3 sets)	3	0	3	3	1	1.00	11	3.67	3	2.11	9	0	1.000	11.5	7.62
8	Albuquerque W (3–1 sets)	4	0	2	2	2	0.50	10	2.50	15	2.27	26	2	.923	10.0	5.19
9	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	6	2.00	4	1.70	20	2	.900	5.5	3.15
11	Burlington L (2–3 sets)	5	0	4	4	0	0.80	19	3.80	19	2.31	35	1	.971	11.0	5.48
13	New Orleans L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	3	1.00	8	2.06	17	3	.824	4.0	2.68
16	Pekin W (3–0 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	6	2.00	8	2.33	15	0	1.000	10.5	7.66
17	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	5	1.67	8	2.11	18	1	.944	7.5	4.69
20	Albuquerque L (1–3 sets)	4	0	4	4	1	1.00	8	2.00	17	2.06	35	5	.857	9.0	4.15
22	Schenectady L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	2	0.67	13	2.26	27	0	1.000	7.0	4.04
25	Antioch L (1–3 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	6	1.50	14	1.97	35	4	.886	16.0	6.37
28	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	2	0.67	12	1.76	33	8	.758	5.0	1.58
32	Columbia L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	3	1.00	12	1.81	26	5	.808	5.5	2.05
35	Burlington L (1–3 sets)	4	0	1	1	0	0.25	6	1.50	11	1.97	29	3	.897	6.5	2.89
Total		56	0	31	31	7	0.55	106	1.89	194	2.08	424	43	.899	135.5	4.61