← New Search ↗ Social Card

Austin Hervey Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-12-31 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 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 11 1 1 2 0.182 0.1410 0.1417 0.6766 0.6799
2010-11 Lincoln Stars USHL 44 4 3 7 0.159 0.0978 0.1008 0.4687 0.4831
2011-12 Des Moines Buccaneers USHL 5 1 0 1 0.200 0.1229 0.1209 0.5892 0.5798
2012-13 Indiana Ice USHL 52 6 8 14 0.269 0.1655 0.1540 0.7931 0.7382
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
2016-17 Adrian D3 NCHA SR 28 8 6 14 0.500
2015-16 Adrian D3 NCHA JR 26 11 9 20 0.769
2014-15 Adrian D3 NCHA SO 25 5 3 8 0.320
2013-14 Adrian D3 NCHA FR 21 3 7 10 0.476
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2013-14 · Adrian
+295.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#35829
Forward overall
#1354
Forward born in 1992

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Utica · 2006-07
0.571 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Hamilton · 2008-09
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Southern New Hampshire · 2017-18
0.909 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.