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

Andrew Miller Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-09-18 Country: USA
Signed Professionally
Shanghai Dragons · KHL

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
2007-08 Chicago Steel USHL 59 14 27 41 0.695 0.4272 0.4168 2.0473 1.9974
2008-09 Chicago Steel USHL 58 32 50 82 1.414 0.8691 0.8090 4.1653 3.8775
2019-20 Shanghai Dragons KHL 52 11 20 31 0.596 1.4905 1.4905 — —
■ 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
2012-13 Yale D1 ECAC SR 37 18 23 41 1.108
2011-12 Yale D1 ECAC JR 34 7 29 36 1.059
2010-11 Yale D1 ECAC SO 36 12 33 45 1.250
2009-10 Yale D1 ECAC FR 34 5 29 34 1.000
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.61
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.00
2009-10 · Yale
+64.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1329
Forward overall
#50
Forward born in 1988

D1 Comparables

Kyle Novak
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Mike Szmatula
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.21 PPG
→ Northeastern (1.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Zach Stepan
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.39 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.84 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Peter Quenneville
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.80 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Toninato
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.09 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.67 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Osmundson
Utica · 2018-19
1.448 Elite
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.