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

Mike Ratchuk Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1988-02-20 Country: USA
2006 · Round 2, Pick #42  ·  Philadelphia Flyers Philadelphia Flyers
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
2004-05 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 58 5 11 16 0.276 0.2051 0.2076 1.0295 1.0422
2005-06 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 39 8 14 22 0.564 0.4193 0.4040 2.1049 2.0281
■ 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
2007-08 Michigan State D1 BigTen SO 42 6 19 25 0.595
2006-07 Michigan State D1 BigTen FR 40 4 8 12 0.300
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.31
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.30
2006-07 · Michigan State
-2.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3012
Defenseman overall
#578
Defenseman born in 1988
#26
in NTDP-U18

D1 Comparables

Will Butcher
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Denver (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Clark Kuster
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ St. Cloud State
0.29 No data
NCAAe PPG
Matt Nuttle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Cornell
0.41 No data
NCAAe PPG
Luke Voltin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Gross
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Bryce Grandbois
Worcester State · 2023-24
0.769 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Logan DiScanio
University of New England · 2017-18
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2002-03
1.800 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.