| Season | Team | League | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG | NCAAe-PPG | Age-Adj | D3e-PPG | Age-Adj |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011-12 | Muskegon Lumberjacks | USHL | 47 | 2 | 13 | 15 | 0.319 | 0.1962 | 0.2135 | 0.9401 | 1.0230 |
| 2012-13 | Indiana Ice | USHL | 12 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0.167 | 0.1025 | 0.1061 | 0.4911 | 0.5083 |
| 2013-14 | Youngstown Phantoms | USHL | 18 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 0.222 | 0.1366 | 0.1350 | 0.6546 | 0.6468 |
| 2014-15 | Janesville Jets | NAHL | 54 | 8 | 28 | 36 | 0.667 | 0.2641 | 0.2565 | 0.7000 | 0.6797 |
| 2015-16 | Janesville Jets | NAHL | 39 | 4 | 19 | 23 | 0.590 | 0.2336 | 0.2165 | 0.6191 | 0.5738 |
| Season | School | Div | Conference | Year | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-20 | Michigan Tech | D1 | WCHA | SR | 39 | 7 | 16 | 23 | 0.590 |
| 2018-19 | Michigan Tech | D1 | WCHA | JR | 33 | 4 | 10 | 14 | 0.424 |
| 2017-18 | Michigan Tech | D1 | WCHA | SO | 40 | 8 | 14 | 22 | 0.550 |
| 2016-17 | Michigan Tech | D1 | WCHA | FR | 43 | 7 | 13 | 20 | 0.465 |
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.