| Season | Team | League | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG | NCAAe-PPG | Age-Adj | D3e-PPG | Age-Adj |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011-12 | Sioux City Musketeers | USHL | 40 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 0.125 | 0.0796 | 0.0834 | 0.3746 | 0.3926 |
| 2012-13 | Waterloo Black Hawks | USHL | 59 | 0 | 10 | 10 | 0.170 | 0.1079 | 0.1074 | 0.5079 | 0.5053 |
| 2013-14 | Waterloo Black Hawks | USHL | 46 | 0 | 14 | 14 | 0.304 | 0.1938 | 0.1838 | 0.9119 | 0.8647 |
| Season | School | Div | Conference | Year | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-17 | Brown | D1 | ECAC | JR | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.000 |
| 2015-16 | Brown | D1 | ECAC | SO | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.250 |
| 2014-15 | Brown | D1 | ECAC | FR | 20 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0.050 |
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.