| Season | Team | League | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG | NCAAe-PPG | Age-Adj | D3e-PPG | Age-Adj |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2011-12 | Amarillo Wranglers | NAHL | 52 | 9 | 23 | 32 | 0.615 | 0.2285 | 0.2301 | — | — |
| 2012-13 | Amarillo Wranglers | NAHL | 58 | 26 | 40 | 66 | 1.138 | 0.4225 | 0.4042 | 1.2048 | 1.1527 |
| Season | School | Div | Conference | Year | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013-14 | UConn | D1 | — | FR | 33 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0.182 |
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.