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 Porterville 40 1378 361 176 178 315 .262 .367 .329
.329 2 Taft 40 1366 366 200 167 279 .268 .366 .372
.372 3 Sequoias 41 1447 400 214 174 300 .276 .374 .367
.367 4 Merced 43 1532 443 293 211 310 .289 .392 .386
.386 5 Coalinga 37 1315 384 216 143 299 .292 .383 .384
.384 6 Fresno City 46 1635 494 348 267 341 .302 .416 .454
.454 7 Reedley 46 1666 522 329 200 314 .313 .398 .444
Rk Team gp 2b 3b hr xbh
$value 1 Porterville 40 65 5 6 76
76 2 Coalinga 37 60 8 15 83
83 3 Taft 40 63 8 21 92
92 4 Merced 43 67 12 19 98
98 5 Sequoias 41 78 7 13 98
98 5 Fresno City 46 94 8 46 148
148 7 Reedley 46 104 18 26 148
Rk Team gp r tb sb cs
$value 1 Porterville 40 205 454 25 9
9 2 Taft 40 229 508 67 24
24 3 Coalinga 37 242 505 77 22
22 4 Sequoias 41 250 531 23 17
17 5 Merced 43 348 591 51 8
8 6 Reedley 46 383 740 28 8
8 6 Fresno City 46 395 742 49 16
Rk Team gp hbp sf sh hdp go fo go/fo pa
$value 1 Coalinga 37 63 21 16 7 329 267 1.23 1558
1558 2 Taft 40 54 16 21 24 338 355 .95 1624
1624 3 Porterville 40 60 14 11 25 333 334 1.00 1641
1641 4 Sequoias 41 57 11 18 23 372 320 1.16 1707
1707 5 Merced 43 63 21 42 9 404 344 1.17 1869
1869 6 Reedley 46 55 29 34 16 392 384 1.02 1984
1984 7 Fresno City 46 74 32 15 21 275 276 1.00 2023
Rk Team app gs ip h r er era
$value 1 Fresno City 46 46 411.1 427 225 189 4.14
4.14 2 Reedley 46 46 409.1 418 280 214 4.71
4.71 3 Sequoias 41 41 364.1 449 272 220 5.43
5.43 4 Merced 43 43 387.0 402 264 251 5.84
5.84 5 Taft 40 40 350.0 433 294 245 6.30
6.30 6 Coalinga 37 37 325.0 436 340 287 7.95
7.95 7 Porterville 40 40 336.0 478 501 418 11.20
Rk Team app gs k k/9 hr whip
$value 1 Fresno City 46 46 387 8.47 14 1.34
1.34 2 Merced 43 43 276 6.42 26 1.51
1.51 3 Reedley 46 46 351 7.72 28 1.59
1.59 4 Taft 40 40 269 6.92 23 1.74
1.74 5 Sequoias 41 41 255 6.30 15 1.74
1.74 5 Coalinga 37 37 273 7.56 13 1.90
1.90 7 Porterville 40 40 258 6.91 27 2.39
Rk Team gp tc po a e pb f%
$value 1 Coalinga 37 1411 978 321 112 26 .921
.921 2 Porterville 40 1451 1006 330 115 36 .921
.921 2 Taft 40 1550 1050 433 67 13 .957
.957 4 Reedley 46 1762 1228 458 76 26 .957
.957 4 Sequoias 41 1581 1092 429 60 18 .962
.962 6 Fresno City 46 1769 1230 473 66 17 .963
.963 7 Merced 43 1699 1162 476 61 26 .964
Rk Team gp dp sba rcs rcs% ci
$value 1 Porterville 40 13 93 15 .139 2
2 2 Merced 43 15 44 11 .200 2
2 2 Reedley 46 24 38 10 .208 1
1 4 Fresno City 46 39 42 14 .250 0
0 5 Coalinga 37 6 40 16 .286 3
3 6 Taft 40 21 46 19 .292 1
1 7 Sequoias 41 36 37 16 .302 0
Rk Team home games attend avg
$value 1 Coalinga 21 0 0
0 2 Fresno City 23 0 0
0 2 Merced 19 0 0
0 2 Porterville 19 0 0
0 2 Sequoias 24 0 0
0 2 Taft 21 1,225 59
59 7 Reedley 25 2,626 106
Rk Team gp ab h rbi bb k avg obp slg
$value 1 Porterville 24 817 197 82 100 194 .241 .343 .308
.308 2 Taft 24 849 250 140 94 152 .294 .378 .412
.412 3 Sequoias 24 843 234 127 101 149 .278 .374 .380
.380 4 Merced 24 867 268 200 126 162 .309 .410 .416
.416 5 Coalinga 24 871 274 162 93 180 .315 .399 .418
.418 6 Fresno City 24 858 274 201 150 165 .319 .434 .498
.498 7 Reedley 24 866 257 156 95 154 .297 .381 .411
Rk Team gp 2b 3b hr xbh
$value 1 Porterville 24 38 1 5 44
44 2 Coalinga 24 41 5 13 59
59 3 Taft 24 49 3 15 67
67 4 Merced 24 39 9 12 60
60 5 Sequoias 24 44 6 10 60
60 5 Fresno City 24 58 7 27 92
92 7 Reedley 24 43 13 10 66
Rk Team gp r tb sb cs
$value 1 Porterville 24 100 252 14 5
5 2 Taft 24 156 350 40 18
18 3 Coalinga 24 181 364 45 11
11 4 Sequoias 24 153 320 15 12
12 5 Merced 24 229 361 33 6
6 6 Reedley 24 183 356 15 4
4 7 Fresno City 24 227 427 29 9
Rk Team gp hbp sf sh hdp go fo go/fo pa
$value 1 Coalinga 24 40 16 14 6 214 172 1.24 1034
1034 2 Taft 24 28 12 9 8 200 224 .89 992
992 3 Porterville 24 31 8 6 13 204 196 1.04 962
962 4 Sequoias 24 33 7 10 9 220 197 1.12 994
994 5 Merced 24 32 14 22 3 216 186 1.16 1061
1061 6 Reedley 24 30 11 16 6 204 212 .96 1018
1018 7 Fresno City 24 39 20 10 11 132 127 1.04 1077
Rk Team app gs ip h r er era
$value 1 Fresno City 24 24 213.1 224 110 90 3.80
3.80 2 Reedley 24 24 213.0 205 128 97 4.10
4.10 3 Sequoias 24 24 213.0 236 134 110 4.65
4.65 4 Merced 24 24 213.0 216 136 128 5.41
5.41 5 Taft 24 24 208.0 261 176 148 6.40
6.40 6 Coalinga 24 24 208.1 296 233 199 8.60
8.60 7 Porterville 24 24 205.0 316 312 269 11.81
Rk Team app gs k k/9 hr whip
$value 1 Fresno City 24 24 204 8.61 2 1.33
1.33 2 Merced 24 24 152 6.42 20 1.47
1.47 3 Reedley 24 24 166 7.01 14 1.46
1.46 4 Taft 24 24 175 7.57 13 1.72
1.72 5 Sequoias 24 24 149 6.30 11 1.62
1.62 6 Coalinga 24 24 160 6.91 11 2.01
2.01 7 Porterville 24 24 150 6.59 21 2.37
Rk Team gp tc po a e pb f%
$value 1 Coalinga 24 917 627 219 71 15 .923
.923 2 Porterville 24 873 615 192 66 20 .924
.924 3 Taft 24 917 624 257 36 8 .961
.961 4 Reedley 24 933 639 254 40 14 .957
.957 5 Sequoias 24 928 639 260 29 8 .969
.969 6 Fresno City 24 945 639 265 41 12 .957
.957 7 Merced 24 940 639 269 32 14 .966
Rk Team gp dp sba rcs rcs% ci
$value 1 Porterville 24 5 65 9 .122 0
0 2 Merced 24 10 20 6 .231 0
0 2 Reedley 24 7 16 6 .273 1
1 4 Fresno City 24 20 26 10 .278 0
0 5 Coalinga 24 6 22 14 .389 0
0 5 Taft 24 10 27 7 .206 0
0 5 Sequoias 24 17 15 9 .375 0
Rk Team home games attend avg
$value 1 Coalinga 12 0 0
0 2 Fresno City 12 0 0
0 2 Merced 12 0 0
0 2 Porterville 12 0 0
0 2 Sequoias 12 0 0
0 2 Taft 12 750 63
63 7 Reedley 12 1,177 99