California Community College Athletic Association

Team Stats

Rk	Team	gp	ab	h	rbi	bb	k	avg	obp	slg
$value 1	Taft	37	948	249	105	93	138	.263	.337	.328
.328 2	Reedley	30	738	200	95	70	101	.271	.341	.346
.346 3	Merced	38	977	277	162	114	184	.284	.368	.372
.372 4	Sequoias	32	821	247	133	65	128	.301	.369	.418
.418 5	Fresno City	40	1099	340	229	133	170	.309	.387	.479
.479 6	Porterville	36	947	296	152	111	133	.313	.389	.421
.421 7	Coalinga	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	2b	3b	hr	xbh
$value 1	Coalinga	-	-	-	-	0
0 2	Reedley	30	36	5	3	44
44 3	Taft	37	37	8	3	48
48 4	Merced	38	50	12	4	66
66 5	Sequoias	32	57	6	9	72
72 6	Porterville	36	56	10	9	75
75 7	Fresno City	40	84	15	24	123

Rk	Team	gp	r	tb	sb	cs
$value 1	Reedley	30	120	255	39	9
9 2	Taft	37	134	311	31	11
11 3	Sequoias	32	148	343	19	6
6 4	Porterville	36	168	399	46	4
4 5	Merced	38	179	363	31	11
11 6	Fresno City	40	252	526	81	14
14 7	Coalinga	-	-	0	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	hbp	sf	sh	hdp	go	fo	go/fo	pa
$value 1	Coalinga	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	0
0 2	Reedley	30	11	5	10	6	105	114	.92	834
834 3	Sequoias	32	26	5	25	6	156	132	1.18	942
942 4	Porterville	36	12	6	11	3	52	85	.61	1087
1087 5	Taft	37	17	8	28	5	126	131	.96	1094
1094 6	Merced	38	22	9	6	0	141	207	.68	1128
1128 7	Fresno City	40	12	8	26	0	94	87	1.08	1278

Rk	Team	app	gs	ip	h	r	er	era
$value 1	Coalinga	-	-	0.0	-	-	-	0.00
0.00 2	Fresno City	40	40	271.2	261	124	110	2.83
2.83 3	Taft	37	37	234.0	347	224	159	4.76
4.76 4	Merced	38	38	238.0	274	208	170	5.00
5.00 5	Reedley	30	30	181.2	317	201	148	5.70
5.70 6	Porterville	36	36	204.2	361	251	184	6.29
6.29 7	Sequoias	32	32	190.1	258	215	172	6.33

Rk	Team	app	gs	k	k/7	hr	whip
$value 1	Coalinga	-	-	-	.00	-	0.00
0.00 2	Fresno City	40	40	160	4.12	11	1.41
1.41 3	Merced	38	38	147	4.32	13	1.55
1.55 4	Taft	37	37	154	4.61	11	1.87
1.87 5	Sequoias	32	32	97	3.57	12	1.98
1.98 6	Porterville	36	36	62	2.12	13	2.09
2.09 7	Reedley	30	30	63	2.43	16	2.11

Rk	Team	gp	tc	po	a	e	pb	f%
$value 1	Reedley	30	724	502	160	62	6	.914
.914 2	Porterville	36	995	633	282	80	31	.920
.920 3	Taft	37	1033	702	253	78	19	.924
.924 4	Sequoias	32	874	569	246	59	20	.932
.932 5	Merced	38	948	676	213	59	30	.938
.938 6	Fresno City	40	1148	815	302	31	9	.973
.973 7	Coalinga	-	0	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	dp	sba	rcs	rcs%	ci
$value 1	Porterville	36	4	50	3	.057	1
1 2	Merced	38	4	73	5	.064	1
1 2	Sequoias	32	5	85	7	.076	4
4 4	Reedley	30	9	33	7	.175	0
0 5	Taft	37	13	58	13	.183	0
0 5	Fresno City	40	13	27	16	.372	1
1 7	Coalinga	-	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	home games	attend	avg
$value 1	Fresno City	20.0	0	0
0 2	Merced	19.0	0	0
0 2	Porterville	13.0	0	0
0 2	Sequoias	13.0	650	50
50 5	Reedley	13.0	763	59
59 6	Coalinga	-	-	-
- 7	Taft	16.0	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	ab	h	rbi	bb	k	avg	obp	slg
$value 1	Taft	15	372	84	35	30	58	.226	.291	.293
.293 2	Reedley	15	386	94	38	31	55	.244	.308	.306
.306 3	Merced	16	453	154	95	39	55	.340	.402	.466
.466 4	Sequoias	15	401	125	62	35	55	.312	.384	.446
.446 5	Fresno City	15	409	149	115	63	44	.364	.455	.589
.589 6	Porterville	15	380	115	65	58	54	.303	.402	.416
.416 7	Coalinga	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	2b	3b	hr	xbh
$value 1	Coalinga	-	-	-	-	0
0 2	Reedley	15	17	2	1	20
20 3	Taft	15	15	2	2	19
19 4	Merced	16	29	8	4	41
41 5	Sequoias	15	33	3	5	41
41 5	Porterville	15	28	3	3	34
34 7	Fresno City	15	35	12	11	58

Rk	Team	gp	r	tb	sb	cs
$value 1	Reedley	15	49	118	23	6
6 2	Taft	15	42	109	12	6
6 2	Sequoias	15	67	179	9	3
3 4	Porterville	15	73	158	20	1
1 5	Merced	16	102	211	16	5
5 6	Fresno City	15	125	241	46	3
3 7	Coalinga	-	-	0	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	hbp	sf	sh	hdp	go	fo	go/fo	pa
$value 1	Coalinga	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	0
0 2	Reedley	15	6	2	6	3	59	64	.92	431
431 3	Sequoias	15	13	2	15	2	79	64	1.23	466
466 4	Porterville	15	8	4	3	0	11	28	.39	453
453 5	Taft	15	6	4	8	1	33	45	.73	420
420 6	Merced	16	12	6	3	0	68	101	.67	513
513 7	Fresno City	15	8	3	12	0	24	27	.89	495

Rk	Team	app	gs	ip	h	r	er	era
$value 1	Coalinga	-	-	0.0	-	-	-	0.00
0.00 2	Fresno City	15	15	95.2	72	28	26	1.90
1.90 3	Taft	15	15	99.0	126	68	50	3.54
3.54 4	Merced	16	16	106.2	92	60	49	3.22
3.22 5	Reedley	15	15	94.0	162	107	84	6.26
6.26 6	Porterville	15	15	88.0	155	108	74	5.89
5.89 7	Sequoias	15	15	95.1	116	85	70	5.14

Rk	Team	app	gs	k	k/7	hr	whip
$value 1	Coalinga	-	-	-	.00	-	0.00
0.00 2	Fresno City	15	15	62	4.54	3	1.18
1.18 3	Merced	16	16	87	5.71	1	1.27
1.27 4	Taft	15	15	62	4.38	3	1.61
1.61 5	Sequoias	15	15	51	3.74	4	1.83
1.83 6	Porterville	15	15	37	2.94	6	2.10
2.10 7	Reedley	15	15	23	1.71	9	2.19

Rk	Team	gp	tc	po	a	e	pb	f%
$value 1	Reedley	15	408	282	96	30	4	.926
.926 2	Porterville	15	419	265	116	38	15	.909
.909 3	Taft	15	444	297	118	29	6	.935
.935 4	Sequoias	15	414	284	108	22	7	.947
.947 5	Merced	16	439	320	97	22	10	.950
.950 6	Fresno City	15	394	287	97	10	1	.975
.975 7	Coalinga	-	0	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	gp	dp	sba	rcs	rcs%	ci
$value 1	Porterville	15	3	26	1	.037	0
0 2	Merced	16	2	16	1	.059	0
0 2	Sequoias	15	2	39	4	.093	0
0 2	Reedley	15	5	16	1	.059	0
0 2	Taft	15	6	26	8	.235	0
0 2	Fresno City	15	1	2	8	.800	1
1 7	Coalinga	-	-	-	-	-	-

Rk	Team	home games	attend	avg
$value 1	Fresno City	8.0	-	-
- 2	Merced	8.0	0	0
0 3	Porterville	8.0	0	0
0 3	Sequoias	7.0	350	50
50 5	Reedley	5.0	421	85
85 6	Coalinga	-	-	-
- 7	Taft	8.0	-	-