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

Ami Peled Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1989-09-27 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
2007-08 Southern Minnesota Express NAHL 51 1 12 13 0.255 0.1010 0.1057 0.2676 0.2801
2008-09 Des Moines Buccaneers USHL 52 1 6 7 0.135 0.0827 0.0812 0.3966 0.3895
2009-10 Des Moines Buccaneers USHL 47 0 6 6 0.128 0.0785 0.0721 0.3762 0.3454
■ 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
2010-11 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 — FR 9 2 1 3 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.07
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2010-11 · Wisconsin-Eau Claire
+366.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#19514
Defenseman overall
#1665
Defenseman born in 1989

D1 Comparables

Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.18 No data
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jordan Fralich
St. Scholastica · 2016-17
0.518 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tino Alunni
Lebanon Valley · 2017-18
0.423 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jared Bromberg
Gustavus Adolphus · 2015-16
0.000 No data
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.