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

Greg Pateryn Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1990-06-20 Country: USA
2008 · Round 4, Pick #128  ·  Toronto Maple Leafs Toronto Maple Leafs
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
2007-08 Ohio Blue Jackets USHL 60 3 24 27 0.450 0.2655 0.2823 1.3515 1.4370
■ 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
2011-12 Michigan D1 CCHA-orig SR 41 2 13 15 0.366
2010-11 Michigan D1 CCHA-orig JR 40 3 14 17 0.425
2009-10 Michigan D1 BigTen SO 33 1 5 6 0.182
2008-09 Michigan D1 BigTen FR 28 0 5 5 0.179
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.27
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.18
2008-09 · Michigan
-33.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3773
Defenseman overall
#722
Defenseman born in 1990
#1794
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Michael Downing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ Michigan (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Michael Brodzinski
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.54 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Neal Pionk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Gross
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Murphy
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Northland (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Connor Armour
Adrian · 2011-12
1.357 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Erik Caron
St. Michael's College · 2001-02
1.280 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Kyle Gallegos
Tufts · 2008-09
1.150 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.