I was a reporter and a sports editor of a local newspaper in my first "career." We relied on each coach for his team's statistics, but knew that we had to go out and see games and players as much as possible. Here's why:
There was a coach at a large NJ high school. He was known for inflating statistics, but I never knew to what level. One year when I was sports editor, he had five, yes five, player bat over .500. His team batting average was a robust .425. His best two pitchers had ERAs under 2.0. His team committed seven errors on the year, with his shortstop, second baseman and first baseman (all.500 hitters) not committing a single error all season. He thought and articulated that he should have four or five players make our first team All-County post-season honor team.
Now the best part. His "baseball machine" was 11-14 on the season.
So I looked at all this and had my staff add up the team's total runs scored and then the RBIs credited to each player on the stat sheet. There were 14 more RBIs credited than total runs on the year.
Problem is that stats are important for recognition purposes, which can lead to exposure to colleges. TR is right, colleges could care less if you hit .400., .500, or .600 in high school - they are projecting what you will do for them in college. But I understand the frustration.
I suggest a conversation with the coach. It's early enough in the season to get this trainer either properly prepared to keep an accurate book, watched more closely, or replaced.