Rk
1 Coalinga 33 838 151 248 42 3 3 127 98 140 52 5 .296 .378 .364
2 Fresno City 38 1057 247 350 63 13 19 222 108 126 62 9 .331 .397 .469
3 Merced 34 925 170 266 47 14 5 153 78 132 57 6 .288 .353 .385
4 Porterville 37 944 217 274 55 4 12 181 132 138 29 6 .290 .386 .395
5 Reedley 28 733 125 195 37 8 5 99 64 115 44 7 .266 .335 .359
6 Sequoias 36 990 251 348 60 12 4 214 103 79 59 10 .352 .417 .448
7 Taft - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rk
1 Coalinga 33 838 151 248 42 3 3 127 98 140 52 5 .296 .378 .364
2 Fresno City 38 1057 247 350 63 13 19 222 108 126 62 9 .331 .397 .469
3 Merced 34 925 170 266 47 14 5 153 78 132 57 6 .288 .353 .385
4 Porterville 37 944 217 274 55 4 12 181 132 138 29 6 .290 .386 .395
5 Reedley 28 733 125 195 37 8 5 99 64 115 44 7 .266 .335 .359
6 Sequoias 36 990 251 348 60 12 4 214 103 79 59 10 .352 .417 .448
7 Taft - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rk
1 Coalinga 33 204.2 286 229 139 97 158 5.40 10 4.75 1.87
2 Fresno City 38 241.1 293 158 113 90 90 2.61 8 3.28 1.59
3 Merced 34 218.0 248 156 136 105 155 4.98 8 4.37 1.62
4 Porterville 37 223.0 334 219 138 62 77 2.42 3 4.33 1.78
5 Reedley 28 167.1 243 202 162 120 58 2.43 9 6.78 2.17
6 Sequoias 36 224.1 248 151 111 110 145 4.52 6 3.46 1.60
7 Taft - 0.0 - - - - - .00 - 0.00 0.00
Rk
1 Coalinga 33 882 607 187 88 .900 0 54 2 .036 22 0
2 Fresno City 38 949 684 214 51 .946 10 29 5 .147 5 0
2 Merced 34 932 654 225 53 .943 4 53 4 .070 11 0
2 Porterville 37 1037 642 317 78 .925 5 65 0 .000 18 0
2 Reedley 28 629 467 119 43 .932 4 46 1 .021 6 0
2 Sequoias 36 893 659 186 48 .946 6 57 6 .095 5 0
2 Taft - 0 - - - - - - - - - -
Rk
1 Coalinga 20.0 0 0
2 Fresno City 14.0 - -
3 Merced 18.0 0 0
4 Porterville 16.0 0 0
4 Reedley 14.0 0 0
4 Sequoias 22.0 1,050 48
7 Taft - - -
Rk
1 Coalinga 14 349 42 92 12 1 1 36 40 59 14 1 .264 .348 .312
2 Fresno City 15 426 123 156 30 7 10 109 50 43 34 3 .366 .429 .540
3 Merced 15 426 95 137 29 7 2 87 42 67 40 3 .322 .394 .437
4 Porterville 15 387 70 106 25 0 5 56 60 61 7 1 .274 .379 .377
5 Reedley 15 410 63 116 20 5 2 54 37 57 20 6 .283 .357 .371
6 Sequoias 14 397 100 135 24 0 2 70 39 33 28 3 .340 .403 .416
7 Taft - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rk
1 Coalinga 14 349 42 92 12 1 1 36 40 59 14 1 .264 .348 .312
2 Fresno City 15 426 123 156 30 7 10 109 50 43 34 3 .366 .429 .540
3 Merced 15 426 95 137 29 7 2 87 42 67 40 3 .322 .394 .437
4 Porterville 15 387 70 106 25 0 5 56 60 61 7 1 .274 .379 .377
5 Reedley 15 410 63 116 20 5 2 54 37 57 20 6 .283 .357 .371
6 Sequoias 14 397 100 135 24 0 2 70 39 33 28 3 .340 .403 .416
7 Taft - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rk
1 Coalinga 14 88.0 135 112 75 46 69 5.49 9 5.97 2.06
2 Fresno City 15 95.0 106 47 37 33 42 3.09 0 2.73 1.46
3 Merced 15 96.1 116 69 58 47 67 4.87 3 4.21 1.69
4 Porterville 15 93.0 161 106 70 28 33 2.48 1 5.27 2.03
5 Reedley 15 99.0 130 111 86 70 42 2.97 3 6.08 2.02
6 Sequoias 14 90.1 92 52 40 48 78 6.04 1 3.10 1.55
7 Taft - 0.0 - - - - - .00 - 0.00 0.00
Rk
1 Coalinga 14 368 264 65 39 .894 0 20 0 .000 7 0
2 Fresno City 15 392 283 97 12 .969 3 8 1 .111 2 0
2 Merced 15 405 289 93 23 .943 2 24 3 .111 3 0
2 Porterville 15 458 284 139 35 .924 0 35 0 .000 9 0
2 Reedley 15 364 285 52 27 .926 1 27 1 .036 2 0
2 Sequoias 14 343 259 62 22 .936 1 28 4 .125 3 0
2 Taft - 0 - - - - - - - - - -
Rk
1 Coalinga 6.0 0 0
2 Fresno City 6.0 - -
3 Merced 7.0 0 0
4 Porterville 6.0 0 0
4 Reedley 9.0 0 0
4 Sequoias 9.0 450 50
7 Taft - - -