Skip to navigation Skip to content Skip to footer
California Community College Athletic Association

Team Stats

Rk Team gp ab h rbi bb k avg obp slg
$value 1 Coalinga 29 686 160 75 76 118 .233 .316 .289
.289 2 Taft 40 1007 272 178 101 166 .270 .356 .399
.399 3 Fresno City 41 1066 308 208 134 95 .289 .379 .438
.438 4 Porterville 41 1097 320 207 160 176 .292 .388 .447
.447 5 Sequoias 44 1175 346 196 95 134 .294 .360 .426
.426 6 Cerro Coso 36 802 237 119 53 160 .296 .356 .400
.400 7 Merced 39 1031 313 194 133 131 .304 .387 .403
.403 8 Reedley 44 1157 384 212 133 96 .332 .407 .430
Rk Team gp 2b 3b hr xbh
$value 1 Coalinga 29 18 4 4 26
26 2 Cerro Coso 36 37 16 5 58
58 3 Merced 39 45 23 4 72
72 4 Taft 40 47 4 25 76
76 5 Reedley 44 60 12 10 82
82 6 Sequoias 44 65 10 23 98
98 7 Fresno City 41 70 7 25 102
102 8 Porterville 41 66 4 32 102
Rk Team gp r tb sb cs
$value 1 Coalinga 29 92 198 17 6
6 2 Cerro Coso 36 145 321 89 21
21 3 Merced 39 211 416 52 8
8 4 Sequoias 44 238 500 24 14
14 5 Taft 40 240 402 47 6
6 6 Porterville 41 241 490 17 5
5 7 Fresno City 41 246 467 61 9
9 8 Reedley 44 263 498 90 11
Rk Team gp hbp sf sh hdp go fo go/fo pa
$value 1 Coalinga 29 7 1 7 4 42 45 .93 777
777 2 Cerro Coso 36 24 3 14 4 175 129 1.36 896
896 3 Taft 40 39 9 14 5 84 108 .78 1170
1170 4 Merced 39 12 7 10 5 230 226 1.02 1193
1193 5 Fresno City 41 31 16 34 1 60 88 .68 1281
1281 6 Porterville 41 18 10 34 1 135 151 .89 1319
1319 7 Reedley 44 20 8 37 7 277 231 1.20 1355
1355 8 Sequoias 44 30 8 50 2 248 235 1.06 1358
Rk Team app gs ip h r er era
$value 1 Reedley 44 44 283.2 230 109 83 2.05
2.05 2 Sequoias 44 44 272.1 227 109 82 2.11
2.11 3 Porterville 41 41 260.2 318 159 118 3.17
3.17 4 Fresno City 41 41 249.0 317 191 151 4.24
4.24 5 Merced 39 39 239.2 280 165 151 4.41
4.41 6 Taft 40 40 229.2 382 302 229 6.98
6.98 7 Coalinga 29 29 147.0 265 258 157 7.48
7.48 8 Cerro Coso 36 36 179.2 347 463 365 14.22
Rk Team app gs k k/7 hr whip
$value 1 Sequoias 44 44 169 4.34 9 1.06
1.06 2 Reedley 44 44 244 6.02 15 1.14
1.14 3 Porterville 41 41 81 2.18 13 1.41
1.41 4 Merced 39 39 141 4.12 12 1.50
1.50 5 Fresno City 41 41 95 2.67 22 1.66
1.66 6 Taft 40 40 65 1.98 22 2.25
2.25 7 Coalinga 29 29 69 3.29 10 2.48
2.48 8 Cerro Coso 36 36 93 3.62 13 3.65
Rk Team gp tc po a e pb f%
$value 1 Cerro Coso 36 870 539 244 87 28 .900
.900 2 Coalinga 29 1041 480 457 104 24 .900
.900 2 Taft 40 1154 714 354 86 37 .925
.925 4 Merced 39 1012 700 262 50 5 .951
.951 5 Fresno City 41 1195 771 365 59 4 .951
.951 5 Porterville 41 1195 778 364 53 13 .956
.956 7 Sequoias 44 1164 819 296 49 12 .958
.958 8 Reedley 44 1119 819 256 44 9 .961
Rk Team gp dp sba rcs rcs% ci
$value 1 Coalinga 29 1 72 2 .027 0
0 2 Sequoias 44 4 48 3 .059 1
1 3 Porterville 41 5 45 4 .082 0
0 4 Merced 39 5 55 9 .141 0
0 4 Fresno City 41 6 34 6 .150 0
0 4 Cerro Coso 36 7 80 16 .167 0
0 4 Taft 40 10 44 12 .214 0
0 4 Reedley 44 1 24 14 .368 0
Rk Team home games attend avg
$value 1 Coalinga 16.0 0 0
0 2 Fresno City 23.0 0 0
0 2 Merced 20.0 0 0
0 2 Porterville 15.0 0 0
0 2 Sequoias 19.0 900 48
48 6 Reedley 21.0 1,810 87
87 7 Cerro Coso 15.0 464,530 30,969
30,969 8 Taft 18.0 - -
Rk Team gp ab h rbi bb k avg obp slg
$value 1 Coalinga 21 480 101 54 61 90 .210 .308 .267
.267 2 Taft 21 492 112 81 45 98 .228 .308 .348
.348 3 Fresno City 21 556 173 144 90 46 .311 .416 .500
.500 4 Porterville 21 554 148 93 91 91 .267 .377 .392
.392 5 Sequoias 21 576 209 140 54 50 .363 .436 .538
.538 6 Cerro Coso 21 433 120 49 29 104 .277 .335 .386
.386 7 Merced 21 574 191 126 86 65 .333 .425 .444
.444 8 Reedley 21 557 195 111 71 34 .350 .428 .469
Rk Team gp 2b 3b hr xbh
$value 1 Coalinga 21 14 2 3 19
19 2 Cerro Coso 21 22 8 3 33
33 3 Merced 21 27 14 3 44
44 4 Taft 21 18 1 13 32
32 5 Reedley 21 34 7 6 47
47 6 Sequoias 21 40 5 17 62
62 7 Fresno City 21 49 7 14 70
70 8 Porterville 21 30 0 13 43
Rk Team gp r tb sb cs
$value 1 Coalinga 21 65 128 14 6
6 2 Cerro Coso 21 67 167 43 17
17 3 Merced 21 137 255 34 4
4 4 Sequoias 21 170 310 10 9
9 5 Taft 21 100 171 27 4
4 6 Porterville 21 114 217 12 3
3 7 Fresno City 21 165 278 27 2
2 8 Reedley 21 142 261 48 5
Rk Team gp hbp sf sh hdp go fo go/fo pa
$value 1 Coalinga 21 7 1 5 3 26 29 .90 554
554 2 Cerro Coso 21 9 0 6 2 60 57 1.05 477
477 3 Taft 21 14 4 12 - 28 46 .61 567
567 4 Merced 21 9 4 9 3 90 115 .78 682
682 5 Fresno City 21 18 11 22 - 36 67 .54 697
697 6 Porterville 21 11 7 20 - 47 53 .89 683
683 7 Reedley 21 9 5 21 4 124 109 1.14 663
663 8 Sequoias 21 23 3 25 2 85 141 .60 681
Rk Team app gs ip h r er era
$value 1 Reedley 21 21 135.0 96 47 37 1.92
1.92 2 Sequoias 21 21 131.1 95 44 27 1.44
1.44 3 Porterville 21 21 138.2 159 69 52 2.63
2.63 4 Fresno City 21 21 133.0 153 80 60 3.16
3.16 5 Merced 21 21 127.2 137 79 72 3.95
3.95 6 Taft 21 21 121.2 201 169 126 7.25
7.25 7 Coalinga 21 21 109.0 194 182 103 6.61
6.61 8 Cerro Coso 21 21 100.1 192 269 208 14.51
Rk Team app gs k k/7 hr whip
$value 1 Sequoias 21 21 89 4.74 4 0.89
0.89 2 Reedley 21 21 143 7.41 11 0.99
0.99 3 Porterville 21 21 42 2.12 5 1.32
1.32 4 Merced 21 21 91 4.99 6 1.46
1.46 5 Fresno City 21 21 58 3.05 12 1.54
1.54 6 Taft 21 21 38 2.19 13 2.35
2.35 7 Coalinga 21 21 53 3.40 9 2.38
2.38 8 Cerro Coso 21 21 54 3.77 11 3.76
Rk Team gp tc po a e pb f%
$value 1 Cerro Coso 21 502 304 146 52 19 .896
.896 2 Coalinga 21 809 373 351 85 24 .895
.895 3 Taft 21 657 377 233 47 19 .928
.928 4 Merced 21 544 374 144 26 4 .952
.952 5 Fresno City 21 648 404 210 34 2 .948
.948 6 Porterville 21 656 421 206 29 7 .956
.956 7 Sequoias 21 589 397 163 29 7 .951
.951 8 Reedley 21 530 410 106 14 6 .974
Rk Team gp dp sba rcs rcs% ci
$value 1 Coalinga 21 1 42 2 .045 0
0 2 Sequoias 21 3 21 2 .087 0
0 2 Porterville 21 2 27 1 .036 0
0 2 Merced 21 2 26 6 .188 0
0 2 Fresno City 21 3 15 5 .250 0
0 2 Cerro Coso 21 4 49 10 .169 0
0 2 Taft 21 5 25 9 .265 0
0 2 Reedley 21 1 10 6 .375 0
Rk Team home games attend avg
$value 1 Coalinga 12.0 0 0
0 2 Fresno City 10.0 - -
- 3 Merced 10.0 0 0
0 4 Porterville 10.0 0 0
0 4 Sequoias 11.0 550 50
50 6 Reedley 12.0 1,074 90
90 7 Cerro Coso 10.0 333,368 33,337
33,337 8 Taft 9.0 - -