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

Nate Ryan Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin 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
2003-04 Wichita Falls Wildcats NAHL 53 24 14 38 0.717 0.2634 0.2634 0.7568 0.7568
■ 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 St. Thomas D3 CCHA SR 29 21 19 40 1.379
2006-07 St. Thomas D3 CCHA JR 27 8 14 22 0.815
2005-06 St. Thomas D3 CCHA SO 12 4 3 7 0.583
2004-05 St. Thomas D3 CCHA FR 8 2 2 4 0.500
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.23
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.50
2004-05 · St. Thomas
+121.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#17168
Forward overall
#947
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Thomas Ebbing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Osterberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.77 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Mitch Hults
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Average
NCAAe PPG
Jake Horton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Harvard (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Aston-Reese
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Trever Hertz
Utica · 2007-08
0.808 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jestin Somero
SUNY Morrisville · 2016-17
0.542 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Andy Corran
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2000-01
0.929 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.