← New Search ↗ Social Card

Ross Enmark Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1985-05-15 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 Lone Star Cavalry NAHL 25 2 9 11 0.440 0.1634 0.1676 0.4659 0.4780
2004-05 Toledo IceDiggers NAHL 51 13 20 33 0.647 0.2403 0.2346 0.6851 0.6687
2005-06 Alpena IceDiggers NAHL 21 7 8 15 0.714 0.2652 0.2457 0.7563 0.7007
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
2009-10 Curry D3 SR 20 11 4 15 0.750
2008-09 Curry D3 JR 20 12 19 31 1.550
2007-08 Curry D3 SO 25 13 19 32 1.280
2006-07 Curry D3 FR 26 23 11 34 1.308
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
Actual FR PPG
1.31
2006-07 · Curry
+533.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#16283
Forward overall
#607
Forward born in 1985
#1283
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.78 PPG
→ Army (0.52 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Canton · 2024-25
0.720 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Norwich · 2008-09
0.632 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Morrisville · 2006-07
0.880 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.