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

Brett Skalski Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-08-03 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 Des Moines Buccaneers USHL 51 10 3 13 0.255 0.1623 0.1501 0.7639 0.7063
■ 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 Manhattanville D3 UCHC SR 27 7 5 12 0.444
2011-12 Manhattanville D3 — JR 25 10 10 20 0.800
2010-11 Manhattanville D3 — SO 26 13 7 20 0.769
2009-10 Manhattanville D3 — FR 27 6 2 8 0.296
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.30
2009-10 · Manhattanville
+130.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#25617
Forward overall
#1039
Forward born in 1988
#3276
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Jayson Angus
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cody Marooney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Bob Kinne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Phil Cherneski
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2000-01
0.739 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Payton Schaly
Plymouth State · 2021-22
0.760 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Mac Olson
Hobart · 2011-12
0.846 Strong
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.