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

Sheldon Dries Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-04-23 Country: USA
Signed Professionally

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
2010-11 — USHL 3 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2011-12 — USHL 59 19 19 38 0.644 0.4102 0.4305 1.9302 2.0256
2012-13 — USHL 54 22 27 49 0.907 0.5778 0.5756 2.7192 2.7089
■ 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 Western Michigan D1 NCHC SR 36 16 14 30 0.833
2015-16 Western Michigan D1 NCHC JR 36 11 7 18 0.500
2014-15 Western Michigan D1 NCHC SO 37 14 15 29 0.784
2013-14 Western Michigan D1 NCHC FR 39 3 4 7 0.179
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.48
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.18
2013-14 · Western Michigan
-62.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Austin Ortega
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.58 Average
NCAAe PPG
John Stevens
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.81 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.59 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Frank Vatrano
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ UMass
0.58 No data
NCAAe PPG
Dennis Kravchenko
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ UMass (0.92 D1 FR PPG)
0.70 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Drew Smolcynski
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.69 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Ryan Reifler
Elmira · 2017-18
1.067 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Geordan Buffoline
New England · 2017-18
1.667 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Joona Juntunen
Saint Mary's · 2023-24
0.826 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.