IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

Mitch Kerns Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1985-12-24 Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2004-05 — USHL 30 0 2 2 0.067 0.0425 0.0422 0.1999 0.1987
2005-06 Billings Bulls NAHL 47 19 10 29 0.617 0.2291 0.2193 0.6533 0.6253
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2007-08 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 — SO 19 3 13 16 0.842
2006-07 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 — FR 28 6 10 16 0.571
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.57
2006-07 · Wisconsin-River Falls
+349.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#27261
Forward overall
#981
Forward born in 1985

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Evan Ritt
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Denver
0.24 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Nick DeCenzo
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Army (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Carlos Fornaris
New England College · 2014-15
1.115 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Clayton Boyd
Neumann · 2016-17
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kevin Drevitch
Worcester State · 2018-19
0.708 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.