Players

Hunter Hill 5 Outside Hitter (OH)
Player Skills
SERVING	RECEIVING	BLOCKING	ATTACKING	DEFENSE	SETTING
14	14	13	15	12	10

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	Kentucky L (1–3 sets)	4	13	3.25	5	29	.276	9	1	2	0.25	20	.900	.	.	.	.	14.5	6.57
2	Nashville W (3–1 sets)	4	11	2.75	5	21	.286	2	0	1	0.00	11	.909	.	.	.	.	12.5	6.67
4	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	16	5.33	5	28	.393	2	0	2	0.00	10	.800	1	0.33	1	1.000	16.0	7.02
5	Baton Rouge L (1–3 sets)	4	9	2.25	9	23	.000	9	0	1	0.00	18	.944	0	0.00	2	.000	9.0	4.76
7	Antioch W (3–1 sets)	4	15	3.75	2	23	.565	8	1	2	0.25	19	.895	.	.	.	.	16.0	7.17
9	Cincinnati L (0–3 sets)	3	14	4.67	4	22	.455	2	1	1	0.33	11	.909	.	.	.	.	15.5	6.94
10	Kentucky W (3–1 sets)	4	11	2.75	4	18	.389	4	0	5	0.00	16	.688	1	0.25	1	1.000	12.5	7.16
11	Nashville L (1–3 sets)	4	18	4.50	6	30	.400	2	0	3	0.00	13	.769	.	.	.	.	18.0	6.98
13	Teutopolis W (3–0 sets)	3	11	3.67	0	16	.688	7	1	2	0.33	12	.833	.	.	.	.	13.0	7.84
15	Albuquerque L (0–3 sets)	3	12	4.00	1	19	.579	0	0	1	0.00	5	.800	.	.	.	.	14.5	8.12
17	Spokane W (3–0 sets)	3	19	6.33	3	27	.593	5	1	3	0.33	13	.769	.	.	.	.	20.0	7.45
18	Denali L (1–3 sets)	4	7	1.75	5	19	.105	5	0	3	0.00	17	.824	.	.	.	.	8.0	4.48
21	Dallas L (0–3 sets)	3	13	4.33	2	25	.440	4	1	2	0.33	11	.818	1	0.33	1	1.000	14.0	7.87
22	Portland L (0–3 sets)	3	8	2.67	7	23	.043	4	1	3	0.33	11	.727	1	0.33	1	1.000	10.5	5.27
25	Manitowoc L (2–3 sets)	5	17	3.40	4	30	.433	4	2	1	0.40	13	.923	1	0.20	1	1.000	23.0	7.26
31	Ames L (0–3 sets)	3	7	2.33	3	16	.250	0	0	1	0.00	7	.857	.	.	.	.	8.0	4.93
36	Denali W (3–0 sets)	3	12	4.00	2	17	.588	5	3	3	1.00	13	.769	0	0.00	1	.000	16.0	8.19
39	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	10	3.33	4	25	.240	2	0	0	0.00	10	1.000	1	0.33	1	1.000	11.0	6.85
Total		63	223	3.54	71	411	.370	74	12	36	0.19	230	.843	8	0.13	9	.889	252.0	6.75

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	Kentucky L (1–3 sets)	4	0	1	1	0	0.25	9	2.25	11	1.93	29	3	.897	14.5	6.57
2	Nashville W (3–1 sets)	4	0	3	3	0	0.75	8	2.00	13	2.38	24	0	1.000	12.5	6.67
4	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	2	0.67	10	2.11	28	1	.964	16.0	7.02
5	Baton Rouge L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	6	1.50	17	2.00	38	6	.842	9.0	4.76
7	Antioch W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	9	2.25	13	2.07	29	2	.931	16.0	7.17
9	Cincinnati L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	1	0.33	3	1.00	10	2.00	26	2	.923	15.5	6.94
10	Kentucky W (3–1 sets)	4	0	3	3	0	0.75	8	2.00	17	2.48	29	0	1.000	12.5	7.16
11	Nashville L (1–3 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	4	1.00	17	2.17	35	3	.914	18.0	6.98
13	Teutopolis W (3–0 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	2	0.67	7	2.33	15	1	.933	13.0	7.84
15	Albuquerque L (0–3 sets)	3	0	5	5	0	1.67	3	1.00	14	2.42	24	0	1.000	14.5	8.12
17	Spokane W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	1	0.33	12	2.07	27	2	.926	20.0	7.45
18	Denali L (1–3 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	7	1.75	16	2.25	28	3	.893	8.0	4.48
21	Dallas L (0–3 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	5	1.67	13	2.29	28	2	.929	14.0	7.87
22	Portland L (0–3 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	2	0.67	7	1.84	19	3	.842	10.5	5.27
25	Manitowoc L (2–3 sets)	5	0	8	8	0	1.60	9	1.80	10	2.09	23	1	.957	23.0	7.26
31	Ames L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	7	2.33	7	2.07	15	1	.933	8.0	4.93
36	Denali W (3–0 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	2	0.67	7	2.38	13	0	1.000	16.0	8.19
39	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	1	0.67	2	0.67	10	2.38	16	1	.938	11.0	6.85
Total		63	0	34	34	4	0.54	89	1.41	211	2.17	446	31	.930	252.0	6.75