Rk
1 Coalinga 35 860 159 243 56 3 11 137 115 128 67 16 .283 .372 .393
2 Fresno City 45 1136 256 346 69 6 26 209 135 123 127 14 .305 .386 .445
3 Merced 35 878 158 271 53 11 1 136 82 145 25 7 .309 .375 .397
4 Porterville - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
5 Reedley 38 941 165 235 37 4 16 150 99 135 35 7 .250 .332 .349
6 Sequoias 40 1166 242 387 74 8 13 224 119 97 26 0 .332 .398 .443
7 Taft 40 1120 210 368 62 9 11 185 118 140 57 7 .329 .397 .429
Rk
1 Coalinga 35 860 159 243 56 3 11 137 115 128 67 16 .283 .372 .393
2 Fresno City 45 1136 256 346 69 6 26 209 135 123 127 14 .305 .386 .445
3 Merced 35 878 158 271 53 11 1 136 82 145 25 7 .309 .375 .397
4 Porterville - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
5 Reedley 38 941 165 235 37 4 16 150 99 135 35 7 .250 .332 .349
6 Sequoias 40 1166 242 387 74 8 13 224 119 97 26 0 .332 .398 .443
7 Taft 40 1120 210 368 62 9 11 185 118 140 57 7 .329 .397 .429
Rk
1 Coalinga 35 205.0 341 251 212 112 147 5.02 10 7.24 2.21
2 Fresno City 45 281.2 292 143 127 86 209 5.19 16 3.16 1.34
3 Merced 35 203.2 374 287 249 86 47 1.62 19 8.56 2.26
4 Porterville - 0.0 - - - - - .00 - 0.00 0.00
5 Reedley 38 240.2 355 241 198 94 75 2.18 13 5.76 1.87
6 Sequoias 40 274.0 227 102 75 59 222 5.67 6 1.92 1.04
7 Taft 40 268.0 367 230 159 113 154 4.02 15 4.15 1.79
Rk
1 Coalinga 35 872 614 197 61 .930 7 70 5 .067 18 0
2 Fresno City 45 1088 844 207 37 .966 6 27 7 .206 5 0
2 Merced 35 909 611 212 86 .905 1 53 4 .070 35 0
2 Porterville - 0 - - - - - - - - - -
5 Reedley 38 1064 713 290 61 .943 5 61 8 .116 7 0
6 Sequoias 40 1090 817 232 41 .962 2 68 6 .081 25 0
6 Taft 40 1195 765 351 79 .934 8 50 13 .206 11 0
Rk
1 Coalinga 19.0 0 0
2 Fresno City 21.0 0 0
2 Merced 20.0 0 0
2 Porterville - - -
5 Reedley 18.0 600 34
6 Sequoias 23.0 1,500 66
7 Taft 14.0 0 0
Rk
1 Coalinga 15 368 49 104 28 0 4 46 33 60 22 6 .283 .344 .391
2 Fresno City 15 385 110 136 28 4 9 93 56 33 42 3 .353 .437 .517
3 Merced 15 395 67 125 31 3 1 62 30 61 13 4 .316 .376 .418
4 Porterville - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
5 Reedley 15 369 54 83 16 3 8 49 36 62 14 2 .225 .315 .350
6 Sequoias 15 453 97 161 28 2 5 90 44 34 16 0 .355 .417 .459
7 Taft 15 435 81 140 12 5 6 75 39 59 17 2 .322 .378 .414
Rk
1 Coalinga 15 368 49 104 28 0 4 46 33 60 22 6 .283 .344 .391
2 Fresno City 15 385 110 136 28 4 9 93 56 33 42 3 .353 .437 .517
3 Merced 15 395 67 125 31 3 1 62 30 61 13 4 .316 .376 .418
4 Porterville - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
5 Reedley 15 369 54 83 16 3 8 49 36 62 14 2 .225 .315 .350
6 Sequoias 15 453 97 161 28 2 5 90 44 34 16 0 .355 .417 .459
7 Taft 15 435 81 140 12 5 6 75 39 59 17 2 .322 .378 .414
Rk
1 Coalinga 15 86.1 165 128 104 53 55 4.46 6 8.43 2.53
2 Fresno City 15 92.1 77 35 28 40 80 6.06 2 2.12 1.27
3 Merced 15 88.2 147 99 80 42 22 1.74 9 6.32 2.13
4 Porterville - 0.0 - - - - - .00 - 0.00 0.00
5 Reedley 15 95.1 146 84 76 31 23 1.69 6 5.58 1.86
6 Sequoias 15 101.0 86 32 25 28 80 5.54 2 1.73 1.13
7 Taft 15 103.2 128 82 55 47 48 3.24 8 3.71 1.69
Rk
1 Coalinga 15 370 255 81 34 .908 3 35 2 .054 5 0
2 Fresno City 15 354 277 65 12 .966 3 2 3 .600 2 0
2 Merced 15 387 266 87 34 .912 1 20 1 .048 22 0
2 Porterville - 0 - - - - - - - - - -
5 Reedley 15 412 286 105 21 .949 2 27 3 .100 0 0
6 Sequoias 15 385 298 74 13 .966 - 25 3 .107 5 0
6 Taft 15 486 311 144 31 .936 5 15 1 .063 6 0
Rk
1 Coalinga 9.0 0 0
2 Fresno City 7.0 0 0
2 Merced 7.0 0 0
2 Porterville - - -
5 Reedley 8.0 100 13
6 Sequoias 7.0 350 50
7 Taft 7.0 0 0