← New Search ↗ Social Card

Greg McCarthy Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1986-01-16 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 Philadelphia Revolution EJHL 48 8 14 22 0.458 0.1358 0.1359
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 Tufts D3 JR 12 4 3 7 0.583
2006-07 Tufts D3 SO 22 9 14 23 1.046
2005-06 Tufts D3 FR 24 14 13 27 1.125
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
Actual FR PPG
1.12
2005-06 · Tufts
+867.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#39251
Forward overall
#1245
Forward born in 1986
#240
in EJHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Brown (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Cornell (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe 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.