Players

Victor Rodrigues 5 Outside Hitter (OH)
Player Skills
SERVING	RECEIVING	BLOCKING	ATTACKING	DEFENSE	SETTING
16	15	13	14	12	6

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
6	Teutopolis W (3–2 sets)	5	6	1.20	3	21	.143	2	0	4	0.00	12	.667	.	.	.	.	8.5	2.67
8	Portland W (3–0 sets)	3	0	0.00	3	9	-.333	12	0	1	0.00	17	.941	1	0.33	1	1.000	2.0	5.54
9	San Diego W (3–0 sets)	3	0	0.00	1	12	-.083	1	0	2	0.00	6	.667	.	.	.	.	2.5	4.55
11	Pekin W (3–1 sets)	4	6	1.50	1	18	.278	6	1	4	0.25	14	.714	0	0.00	1	.000	7.0	2.16
12	Ames W (3–0 sets)	3	9	3.00	3	19	.316	3	0	1	0.00	10	.900	.	.	.	.	9.5	5.96
15	Burlington L (0–3 sets)	3	4	1.33	6	15	-.133	7	3	1	1.00	16	.938	.	.	.	.	8.0	4.47
16	Cincinnati L (2–3 sets)	5	6	1.20	5	21	.048	5	1	3	0.20	15	.800	.	.	.	.	9.0	3.03
18	Schenectady W (3–2 sets)	5	2	0.40	3	9	-.111	7	2	5	0.40	17	.706	.	.	.	.	6.5	4.14
19	Pekin W (3–2 sets)	5	10	2.00	2	18	.444	4	0	2	0.00	13	.846	0	0.00	1	.000	12.0	3.81
21	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	3	1.00	4	20	-.050	3	0	1	0.00	10	.900	.	.	.	.	5.0	4.52
25	Carlsbad W (3–1 sets)	4	9	2.25	2	19	.368	5	0	3	0.00	13	.769	.	.	.	.	10.0	5.22
26	New Orleans W (3–2 sets)	5	6	1.20	4	16	.125	8	2	1	0.40	18	.944	.	.	.	.	9.0	3.52
29	Ames W (3–1 sets)	4	6	1.50	4	19	.105	5	0	3	0.00	12	.750	.	.	.	.	7.0	3.74
30	Sheboygan L (1–3 sets)	4	7	1.75	4	13	.231	2	0	1	0.00	10	.900	.	.	.	.	8.5	2.52
34	Portland W (3–0 sets)	3	8	2.67	2	13	.462	9	2	3	0.67	14	.786	.	.	.	.	10.0	5.80
35	St. Charles W (3–1 sets)	4	8	2.00	1	13	.538	5	1	2	0.25	14	.857	1	0.25	1	1.000	9.5	4.43
Total		63	90	1.43	48	255	.165	84	12	37	0.19	211	.825	2	0.03	4	.500	124.0	4.13

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
6	Teutopolis W (3–2 sets)	5	1	3	4	0	0.80	3	0.60	8	1.84	32	4	.875	8.5	2.67
8	Portland W (3–0 sets)	3	0	4	4	1	1.33	5	1.67	8	2.22	18	1	.944	2.0	5.54
9	San Diego W (3–0 sets)	3	0	5	5	0	1.67	5	1.67	9	2.25	16	1	.938	2.5	4.55
11	Pekin W (3–1 sets)	4	.	.	.	.	.	4	1.00	8	1.63	27	4	.852	7.0	2.16
12	Ames W (3–0 sets)	3	0	1	1	0	0.33	5	1.67	15	2.06	31	3	.903	9.5	5.96
15	Burlington L (0–3 sets)	3	0	2	2	1	0.67	4	1.33	13	2.07	28	3	.893	8.0	4.47
16	Cincinnati L (2–3 sets)	5	0	4	4	0	0.80	3	0.60	13	1.82	39	5	.872	9.0	3.03
18	Schenectady W (3–2 sets)	5	0	5	5	0	1.00	3	0.60	17	2.08	38	4	.895	6.5	4.14
19	Pekin W (3–2 sets)	5	0	4	4	1	0.80	4	0.80	13	2.04	27	4	.852	12.0	3.81
21	Baton Rouge L (0–3 sets)	3	0	4	4	0	1.33	6	2.00	11	2.14	22	1	.955	5.0	4.52
25	Carlsbad W (3–1 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	4	1.00	18	2.16	31	5	.839	10.0	5.22
26	New Orleans W (3–2 sets)	5	0	2	2	0	0.40	5	1.00	16	2.00	38	8	.789	9.0	3.52
29	Ames W (3–1 sets)	4	0	2	2	0	0.50	6	1.50	11	2.04	27	2	.926	7.0	3.74
30	Sheboygan L (1–3 sets)	4	1	1	2	0	0.50	5	1.25	12	1.79	33	8	.758	8.5	2.52
34	Portland W (3–0 sets)	3	.	.	.	.	.	3	1.00	6	2.13	15	1	.933	10.0	5.80
35	St. Charles W (3–1 sets)	4	0	1	1	0	0.25	4	1.00	17	2.29	31	1	.968	9.5	4.43
Total		63	2	40	42	4	0.67	69	1.10	195	2.02	453	55	.879	124.0	4.13