| Season | Team | League | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG | NCAAe-PPG | Age-Adj | D3e-PPG | Age-Adj |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009-10 | — | NTDP-U18 | 42 | 10 | 6 | 16 | 0.381 | 0.2954 | 0.2989 | 1.4180 | 1.4347 |
| 2010-11 | U.S. National U18 Team | NTDP-U18 | 60 | 14 | 9 | 23 | 0.383 | 0.2972 | 0.2880 | 1.4266 | 1.3826 |
| Season | School | Div | Conference | Year | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-21 | Michigan Tech | D1 | WCHA | — | 0 | 52 | 662 | 714 | 0.000 |
| 2019-20 | Michigan Tech | D1 | WCHA | — | 0 | 10 | 66 | 76 | 0.000 |
| 2014-15 | Michigan Tech | D1 | WCHA | SR | 40 | 14 | 16 | 30 | 0.750 |
| 2013-14 | Michigan Tech | D1 | WCHA | JR | 39 | 8 | 20 | 28 | 0.718 |
| 2012-13 | Michigan | D1 | CCHA-orig | — | 35 | 14 | 10 | 24 | 0.686 |
| 2012-13 | Michigan Tech | D1 | — | SO | 35 | 14 | 10 | 24 | 0.686 |
| 2011-12 | Michigan | D1 | CCHA-orig | — | 39 | 10 | 14 | 24 | 0.615 |
| 2011-12 | Michigan Tech | D1 | — | FR | 39 | 10 | 14 | 24 | 0.615 |
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.