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

Chris Berenguer Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1985-12-06 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 Santa Fe Roadrunners NAHL 54 6 17 23 0.426 0.1581 0.1588 0.4509 0.4528
2005-06 Sioux Falls Stampede USHL 57 5 17 22 0.386 0.2458 0.2308 1.1567 1.0862
■ 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
2010-11 Hamline D3 MIAC SR 28 13 19 32 1.143
2009-10 Hamline D3 — JR 25 6 22 28 1.120
2008-09 Hamline D3 — SO 28 14 25 39 1.393
2007-08 Hamline D3 — FR 18 4 13 17 0.944
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.94
2007-08 · Hamline
+395.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3710
Defenseman overall
#710
Defenseman born in 1985

D1 Comparables

Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.16 No data
NCAAe PPG
Garret Peterson
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ Army (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Greg Harris
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2000-01
0.722 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nikita Kozyrev
Buffalo State · 2018-19
1.231 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Nick Catanzaro
SUNY Cortland · 2002-03
0.958 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.