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

Brian Ferlin Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-06-03 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
2009-10 Indiana Ice USHL 57 6 10 16 0.281 0.1725 0.1815 0.8270 0.8702
2010-11 Indiana Ice USHL 55 25 48 73 1.327 0.8159 0.8174 3.9105 3.9175
■ 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
2013-14 Cornell D1 ECAC JR 32 13 14 27 0.844
2012-13 Cornell D1 ECAC SO 34 10 14 24 0.706
2011-12 Cornell D1 ECAC FR 26 8 13 21 0.808
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.52
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.81
2011-12 · Cornell
+54.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#4536
Forward overall
#236
Forward born in 1992
#211
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Nick Schilkey
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.70 D1 FR PPG)
0.74 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Vinnie Hinostroza
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.30 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.94 D1 FR PPG)
0.80 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Dennis Kravchenko
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ UMass (0.92 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Austin Cangelosi
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.14 PPG
→ Boston College (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.71 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Peter Quenneville
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.80 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Filimon Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 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.