← New Search ↗ Social Card

Maxim Muranov Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-06-02 Country: Russia
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
2021-22 Calgary Hitmen WHL 50 5 8 13 0.260 0.1265 0.1326 0.6371 0.6680
2022-23 Calgary Hitmen WHL 63 6 22 28 0.444 0.2162 0.2166 1.0889 1.0910
2023-24 Calgary Hitmen WHL 63 22 28 50 0.794 0.3861 0.3678 1.9448 1.8527
2024-25 Calgary Hitmen WHL 61 13 24 37 0.607 0.2951 0.2654 1.4864 1.3366
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
2025-26 Niagara D1 AHA FR 33 8 14 22 0.667
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.26
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.67
2025-26 · Niagara
+154.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

12%
NCAA D1
15%
NCAA D2/D3
72%
Age-Out / Club
0%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#15108
Forward overall
#725
Forward born in 2004
#822
in WHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Utica · 2000-01
0.920 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2012-13
1.138 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
St. Michael's College · 2003-04
1.280 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.