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

Torey Krug Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1991-04-12 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
2008-09 — USHL 59 10 37 47 0.797 0.4699 0.4976 2.3925 2.5338
■ 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 State D1 BigTen JR 38 12 22 34 0.895
2010-11 Michigan State D1 BigTen SO 38 11 17 28 0.737
2009-10 Michigan State D1 BigTen FR 38 3 18 21 0.553
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.47
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.55
2009-10 · Michigan State
+17.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1256
Defenseman overall
#264
Defenseman born in 1991
#366
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Matt Nuttle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Cornell
0.41 No data
NCAAe PPG
Will Butcher
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Denver (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Ian McCoshen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.83 PPG
→ Boston College (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Mark Friedman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Matias Cleland
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Sascha Figi
Fitchburg State · 2016-17
1.429 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Reifler
Elmira · 2017-18
1.067 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Rihards Marenis
Aurora · 2013-14
1.000 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.