California Community College Athletic Association

Team Stats

Rk	Team	gp	ab	h	rbi	bb	k	avg	obp	slg
1.199134199134199 1	Reedley	44	1157	384	212	133	96	.332	.407	.430
1.0176991150442478 2	Merced	39	1031	313	194	133	131	.304	.387	.403
1.3565891472868217 3	Cerro Coso	36	802	237	119	53	160	.296	.356	.400
1.0553191489361702 4	Sequoias	44	1175	346	196	95	134	.294	.360	.426
0.8940397350993378 5	Porterville	41	1097	320	207	160	176	.292	.388	.447
0.6818181818181818 6	Fresno City	41	1066	308	208	134	95	.289	.379	.438
0.7777777777777778 7	Taft	40	1007	272	178	101	166	.270	.356	.399
0.9333333333333333 8	Coalinga	29	686	160	75	76	118	.233	.316	.289

Rk	Team	gp	2b	3b	hr	xbh
0.6818181818181818 1	Fresno City	41	70	7	25	102
0.8940397350993378 2	Porterville	41	66	4	32	102
1.0553191489361702 3	Sequoias	44	65	10	23	98
1.199134199134199 4	Reedley	44	60	12	10	82
0.7777777777777778 5	Taft	40	47	4	25	76
1.0176991150442478 6	Merced	39	45	23	4	72
1.3565891472868217 7	Cerro Coso	36	37	16	5	58
0.9333333333333333 8	Coalinga	29	18	4	4	26

Rk	Team	gp	r	tb	sb	cs
1.199134199134199 1	Reedley	44	263	498	90	11
0.6818181818181818 2	Fresno City	41	246	467	61	9
0.8940397350993378 3	Porterville	41	241	490	17	5
0.7777777777777778 4	Taft	40	240	402	47	6
1.0553191489361702 5	Sequoias	44	238	500	24	14
1.0176991150442478 6	Merced	39	211	416	52	8
1.3565891472868217 7	Cerro Coso	36	145	321	89	21
0.9333333333333333 8	Coalinga	29	92	198	17	6

Rk	Team	gp	hbp	sf	sh	hdp	go	fo	go/fo	pa
1.3565891472868217 1	Cerro Coso	36	24	3	14	4	175	129	1.36	896
1.199134199134199 2	Reedley	44	20	8	37	7	277	231	1.20	1355
1.0553191489361702 3	Sequoias	44	30	8	50	2	248	235	1.06	1358
1.0176991150442478 4	Merced	39	12	7	10	5	230	226	1.02	1193
0.9333333333333333 5	Coalinga	29	7	1	7	4	42	45	.93	777
0.8940397350993378 6	Porterville	41	18	10	34	1	135	151	.89	1319
0.7777777777777778 7	Taft	40	39	9	14	5	84	108	.78	1170
0.6818181818181818 8	Fresno City	41	31	16	34	1	60	88	.68	1281

Rk	Team	app	gs	ip	h	r	er	era
1.3565891472868217 1	Cerro Coso	36	36	179.2	347	463	365	14.22
0.9333333333333333 2	Coalinga	29	29	147.0	265	258	157	7.48
0.7777777777777778 3	Taft	40	40	229.2	382	302	229	6.98
1.0176991150442478 4	Merced	39	39	239.2	280	165	151	4.41
0.6818181818181818 5	Fresno City	41	41	249.0	317	191	151	4.24
0.8940397350993378 6	Porterville	41	41	260.2	318	159	118	3.17
1.0553191489361702 7	Sequoias	44	44	272.1	227	109	82	2.11
1.199134199134199 8	Reedley	44	44	283.2	230	109	83	2.05

Rk	Team	app	gs	k	k/7	hr	whip
1.3565891472868217 1	Cerro Coso	36	36	93	3.62	13	3.65
0.9333333333333333 2	Coalinga	29	29	69	3.29	10	2.48
0.7777777777777778 3	Taft	40	40	65	1.98	22	2.25
0.6818181818181818 4	Fresno City	41	41	95	2.67	22	1.66
1.0176991150442478 5	Merced	39	39	141	4.12	12	1.50
0.8940397350993378 6	Porterville	41	41	81	2.18	13	1.41
1.199134199134199 7	Reedley	44	44	244	6.02	15	1.14
1.0553191489361702 8	Sequoias	44	44	169	4.34	9	1.06

Rk	Team	gp	tc	po	a	e	pb	f%
1.199134199134199 1	Reedley	44	1119	819	256	44	9	.961
1.0553191489361702 2	Sequoias	44	1164	819	296	49	12	.958
0.8940397350993378 3	Porterville	41	1195	778	364	53	13	.956
0.6818181818181818 4	Fresno City	41	1195	771	365	59	4	.951
1.0176991150442478 5	Merced	39	1012	700	262	50	5	.951
0.7777777777777778 6	Taft	40	1154	714	354	86	37	.925
0.9333333333333333 7	Coalinga	29	1041	480	457	104	24	.900
1.3565891472868217 8	Cerro Coso	36	870	539	244	87	28	.900

Rk	Team	gp	dp	sba	rcs	rcs%	ci
1.199134199134199 1	Reedley	44	1	24	14	.368	0
0.7777777777777778 2	Taft	40	10	44	12	.214	0
1.3565891472868217 3	Cerro Coso	36	7	80	16	.167	0
0.6818181818181818 4	Fresno City	41	6	34	6	.150	0
1.0176991150442478 5	Merced	39	5	55	9	.141	0
0.8940397350993378 6	Porterville	41	5	45	4	.082	0
1.0553191489361702 7	Sequoias	44	4	48	3	.059	1
0.9333333333333333 8	Coalinga	29	1	72	2	.027	0

Rk	Team	home games	attend	avg
1.3565891472868217 1	Cerro Coso	15.0	464,530	30,969
1.199134199134199 2	Reedley	21.0	1,810	87
1.0553191489361702 3	Sequoias	19.0	900	48
0.6818181818181818 4	Fresno City	23.0	0	0
0.7777777777777778 5	Taft	18.0	-	-
0.8940397350993378 6	Porterville	15.0	0	0
0.9333333333333333 7	Coalinga	16.0	0	0
1.0176991150442478 8	Merced	20.0	0	0

Rk	Team	gp	ab	h	rbi	bb	k	avg	obp	slg
1.1376146788990826 1	Reedley	21	557	195	111	71	34	.350	.428	.469
0.782608695652174 2	Merced	21	574	191	126	86	65	.333	.425	.444
1.0526315789473684 3	Cerro Coso	21	433	120	49	29	104	.277	.335	.386
0.6028368794326241 4	Sequoias	21	576	209	140	54	50	.363	.436	.538
0.8867924528301887 5	Porterville	21	554	148	93	91	91	.267	.377	.392
0.5373134328358209 6	Fresno City	21	556	173	144	90	46	.311	.416	.500
0.6086956521739131 7	Taft	21	492	112	81	45	98	.228	.308	.348
0.896551724137931 8	Coalinga	21	480	101	54	61	90	.210	.308	.267

Rk	Team	gp	2b	3b	hr	xbh
0.5373134328358209 1	Fresno City	21	49	7	14	70
0.8867924528301887 2	Porterville	21	30	0	13	43
0.6028368794326241 3	Sequoias	21	40	5	17	62
1.1376146788990826 4	Reedley	21	34	7	6	47
0.6086956521739131 5	Taft	21	18	1	13	32
0.782608695652174 6	Merced	21	27	14	3	44
1.0526315789473684 7	Cerro Coso	21	22	8	3	33
0.896551724137931 8	Coalinga	21	14	2	3	19

Rk	Team	gp	r	tb	sb	cs
1.1376146788990826 1	Reedley	21	142	261	48	5
0.5373134328358209 2	Fresno City	21	165	278	27	2
0.8867924528301887 3	Porterville	21	114	217	12	3
0.6086956521739131 4	Taft	21	100	171	27	4
0.6028368794326241 5	Sequoias	21	170	310	10	9
0.782608695652174 6	Merced	21	137	255	34	4
1.0526315789473684 7	Cerro Coso	21	67	167	43	17
0.896551724137931 8	Coalinga	21	65	128	14	6

Rk	Team	gp	hbp	sf	sh	hdp	go	fo	go/fo	pa
1.0526315789473684 1	Cerro Coso	21	9	0	6	2	60	57	1.05	477
1.1376146788990826 2	Reedley	21	9	5	21	4	124	109	1.14	663
0.6028368794326241 3	Sequoias	21	23	3	25	2	85	141	.60	681
0.782608695652174 4	Merced	21	9	4	9	3	90	115	.78	682
0.896551724137931 5	Coalinga	21	7	1	5	3	26	29	.90	554
0.8867924528301887 6	Porterville	21	11	7	20	-	47	53	.89	683
0.6086956521739131 7	Taft	21	14	4	12	-	28	46	.61	567
0.5373134328358209 8	Fresno City	21	18	11	22	-	36	67	.54	697

Rk	Team	app	gs	ip	h	r	er	era
1.0526315789473684 1	Cerro Coso	21	21	100.1	192	269	208	14.51
0.896551724137931 2	Coalinga	21	21	109.0	194	182	103	6.61
0.6086956521739131 3	Taft	21	21	121.2	201	169	126	7.25
0.782608695652174 4	Merced	21	21	127.2	137	79	72	3.95
0.5373134328358209 5	Fresno City	21	21	133.0	153	80	60	3.16
0.8867924528301887 6	Porterville	21	21	138.2	159	69	52	2.63
0.6028368794326241 7	Sequoias	21	21	131.1	95	44	27	1.44
1.1376146788990826 8	Reedley	21	21	135.0	96	47	37	1.92

Rk	Team	app	gs	k	k/7	hr	whip
1.0526315789473684 1	Cerro Coso	21	21	54	3.77	11	3.76
0.896551724137931 2	Coalinga	21	21	53	3.40	9	2.38
0.6086956521739131 3	Taft	21	21	38	2.19	13	2.35
0.5373134328358209 4	Fresno City	21	21	58	3.05	12	1.54
0.782608695652174 5	Merced	21	21	91	4.99	6	1.46
0.8867924528301887 6	Porterville	21	21	42	2.12	5	1.32
1.1376146788990826 7	Reedley	21	21	143	7.41	11	0.99
0.6028368794326241 8	Sequoias	21	21	89	4.74	4	0.89

Rk	Team	gp	tc	po	a	e	pb	f%
1.1376146788990826 1	Reedley	21	530	410	106	14	6	.974
0.6028368794326241 2	Sequoias	21	589	397	163	29	7	.951
0.8867924528301887 3	Porterville	21	656	421	206	29	7	.956
0.5373134328358209 4	Fresno City	21	648	404	210	34	2	.948
0.782608695652174 5	Merced	21	544	374	144	26	4	.952
0.6086956521739131 6	Taft	21	657	377	233	47	19	.928
0.896551724137931 7	Coalinga	21	809	373	351	85	24	.895
1.0526315789473684 8	Cerro Coso	21	502	304	146	52	19	.896

Rk	Team	gp	dp	sba	rcs	rcs%	ci
1.1376146788990826 1	Reedley	21	1	10	6	.375	0
0.6086956521739131 2	Taft	21	5	25	9	.265	0
1.0526315789473684 3	Cerro Coso	21	4	49	10	.169	0
0.5373134328358209 4	Fresno City	21	3	15	5	.250	0
0.782608695652174 5	Merced	21	2	26	6	.188	0
0.8867924528301887 6	Porterville	21	2	27	1	.036	0
0.6028368794326241 7	Sequoias	21	3	21	2	.087	0
0.896551724137931 8	Coalinga	21	1	42	2	.045	0

Rk	Team	home games	attend	avg
1.0526315789473684 1	Cerro Coso	10.0	333,368	33,337
1.1376146788990826 2	Reedley	12.0	1,074	90
0.6028368794326241 3	Sequoias	11.0	550	50
0.5373134328358209 4	Fresno City	10.0	-	-
0.6086956521739131 5	Taft	9.0	-	-
0.8867924528301887 6	Porterville	10.0	0	0
0.896551724137931 7	Coalinga	12.0	0	0
0.782608695652174 8	Merced	10.0	0	0