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

Ryan Haggerty Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-03-04 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 — NTDP-U18 54 10 9 19 0.352 0.2616 0.2651 1.3131 1.3307
2010-11 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 54 11 18 29 0.537 0.3992 0.3875 2.0038 1.9453
■ 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 RPI D1 ECAC JR 35 28 15 43 1.229
2012-13 RPI D1 ECAC SO 36 12 14 26 0.722
2011-12 RPI D1 ECAC FR 35 7 8 15 0.429
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.29
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.43
2011-12 · RPI
+47.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11727
Forward overall
#438
Forward born in 1993

D1 Comparables

Tyler Motte
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Michigan (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Average
NCAAe PPG
Evan Allen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ Michigan (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Scott Conway
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Penn State (0.76 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Strong
NCAAe PPG
John Hayden
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Yale (0.48 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Average
NCAAe PPG
Luke Stork
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brycon Johnson
Bryn Athyn · 2014-15
0.778 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Justin Fox
Salem State · 2005-06
1.429 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Zach Tarantino
UMass Dartmouth · 2017-18
0.667 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.