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

Clayton Rehm Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1984-11-28 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 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 53 7 21 28 0.528 0.2093 0.2099 0.5547 0.5563
2004-05 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 56 12 21 33 0.589 0.2335 0.2226 0.6187 0.5897
■ 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
2008-09 St. John's D3 — SR 25 1 15 16 0.640
2007-08 St. John's D3 — JR 27 8 16 24 0.889
2006-07 St. John's D3 — SO 18 0 7 7 0.389
2005-06 St. Thomas D3 — FR 22 1 6 7 0.318
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.32
2005-06 · St. Thomas
+55.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5421
Defenseman overall
#695
Defenseman born in 1984
#1964
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.18 No data
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Van Voorhis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Austin Dollimer
Augsburg · 2017-18
0.750 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Alex Nagel
Wisconsin-Stout · 2017-18
0.423 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Cayden Kraus
Salve Regina · 2018-19
0.833 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.