Players

Jason Maxwell 5 Outside Hitter (OH)
Player Skills
SERVING	RECEIVING	BLOCKING	ATTACKING	DEFENSE	SETTING
15	15	13	15	11	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	Denali L (1–3 sets)	4	10	2.50	3	18	.389	3	1	2	0.25	13	.846	.	.	.	.	12.0	5.99
3	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	9	3.00	5	25	.160	4	0	1	0.00	11	.909	.	.	.	.	10.0	6.04
4	Mat-Su W (3–2 sets)	5	30	6.00	7	45	.511	7	1	4	0.20	17	.765	.	.	.	.	31.5	8.10
5	Tucson L (0–3 sets)	3	10	3.33	1	18	.500	3	1	1	0.33	11	.909	.	.	.	.	12.5	6.81
7	Santa Clara L (0–3 sets)	3	15	5.00	6	27	.333	5	2	1	0.67	13	.923	.	.	.	.	19.5	8.92
9	Pekin W (3–1 sets)	4	15	3.75	4	28	.393	8	0	4	0.00	19	.789	.	.	.	.	15.5	7.61
10	Denali L (2–3 sets)	5	20	4.00	9	33	.333	8	1	3	0.20	20	.850	.	.	.	.	22.5	7.39
11	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	8	2.67	6	22	.091	4	2	2	0.67	13	.846	.	.	.	.	11.5	7.29
13	Mat-Su L (1–3 sets)	4	16	4.00	3	31	.419	4	1	2	0.25	14	.857	.	.	.	.	18.5	6.55
14	San Diego W (3–0 sets)	3	7	2.33	2	12	.417	5	1	1	0.33	14	.929	.	.	.	.	9.5	6.11
17	Quincy W (3–1 sets)	4	16	4.00	7	33	.273	8	2	0	0.50	16	1.000	.	.	.	.	21.0	8.48
18	Teutopolis W (3–0 sets)	3	9	3.00	2	17	.412	9	2	3	0.67	15	.800	.	.	.	.	11.5	6.34
21	Sheboygan L (0–3 sets)	3	17	5.67	5	28	.429	4	1	4	0.33	11	.636	.	.	.	.	18.5	8.07
22	Kentucky W (3–0 sets)	3	17	5.67	2	27	.556	2	1	2	0.33	9	.778	.	.	.	.	18.5	7.05
25	Arlington W (3–0 sets)	3	12	4.00	0	16	.750	6	0	3	0.00	13	.769	.	.	.	.	13.0	7.29
29	Santa Clara W (3–0 sets)	3	10	3.33	1	16	.563	4	0	2	0.00	12	.833	1	0.33	1	1.000	12.5	7.69
33	Mendon L (0–3 sets)	3	8	2.67	2	16	.375	5	2	0	0.67	14	1.000	.	.	.	.	11.0	6.11
35	Ames W (3–0 sets)	3	15	5.00	1	20	.700	13	3	1	1.00	20	.950	.	.	.	.	18.5	9.44
39	Tucson W (3–0 sets)	3	6	2.00	1	10	.500	2	1	0	0.33	10	1.000	.	.	.	.	8.0	4.40
45	San Jose W (3–0 sets)	3	10	3.33	1	12	.750	9	1	1	0.33	15	.933	.	.	.	.	12.0	7.73
Total		68	260	3.82	68	454	.423	113	23	37	0.34	280	.868	1	0.01	1	1.000	307.5	7.17

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	Denali L (1–3 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	5	1.25	26	2.46	39	2	.949	12.0	5.99
3	Teutopolis L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	3	1.00	14	2.03	31	3	.903	10.0	6.04
4	Mat-Su W (3–2 sets)	5	0	1	1	0	0.20	5	1.00	16	2.16	31	3	.903	31.5	8.10
5	Tucson L (0–3 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	3	1.00	8	2.15	13	1	.923	12.5	6.81
7	Santa Clara L (0–3 sets)	3	0	5	5	0	1.67	2	0.67	18	2.27	30	2	.933	19.5	8.92
9	Pekin W (3–1 sets)	4	0	1	1	0	0.25	8	2.00	12	2.19	32	0	1.000	15.5	7.61
10	Denali L (2–3 sets)	5	0	3	3	0	0.60	2	0.40	15	2.12	34	3	.912	22.5	7.39
11	Carlsbad L (0–3 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	5	1.67	12	2.50	20	0	1.000	11.5	7.29
13	Mat-Su L (1–3 sets)	4	0	3	3	0	0.75	.	.	16	1.97	36	5	.861	18.5	6.55
14	San Diego W (3–0 sets)	3	0	3	3	0	1.00	4	1.33	13	2.26	23	0	1.000	9.5	6.11
17	Quincy W (3–1 sets)	4	0	6	6	0	1.50	7	1.75	13	2.07	27	3	.889	21.0	8.48
18	Teutopolis W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	5	1.67	4	1.91	11	0	1.000	11.5	6.34
21	Sheboygan L (0–3 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	4	1.33	15	2.11	27	5	.815	18.5	8.07
22	Kentucky W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	2	0.33	.	.	9	2.10	21	2	.905	18.5	7.05
25	Arlington W (3–0 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	.	.	11	2.09	22	3	.864	13.0	7.29
29	Santa Clara W (3–0 sets)	3	0	5	5	1	1.67	2	0.67	12	2.35	20	2	.900	12.5	7.69
33	Mendon L (0–3 sets)	3	1	0	1	0	0.33	5	1.67	15	2.11	28	4	.857	11.0	6.11
35	Ames W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	5	1.67	10	2.44	18	0	1.000	18.5	9.44
39	Tucson W (3–0 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	4	1.33	11	2.21	24	0	1.000	8.0	4.40
45	San Jose W (3–0 sets)	3	0	2	2	0	0.67	5	1.67	13	2.21	24	2	.917	12.0	7.73
Total		68	1	47	48	3	0.71	74	1.09	263	2.19	511	40	.922	307.5	7.17