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

Mark Friedman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1995-12-25 Country: Canada
2014 · Round 3, Pick #86  ·  Philadelphia Flyers Philadelphia Flyers
Signed Professionally
Rögle BK · SHL

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 North York Rangers OJHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2011-12 North York Rangers OJHL 48 9 18 27 0.562 0.1379 0.1580 0.3873 0.4437
2012-13 Waterloo Black Hawks USHL 64 8 27 35 0.547 0.3226 0.3484 1.6426 1.7738
2013-14 Waterloo Black Hawks USHL 51 10 30 40 0.784 0.4627 0.4780 2.3556 2.4335
2025-26 Rögle BK SHL 47 3 12 15 0.319 0.7977 0.7977 4.1638 4.1638
■ 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 Bowling Green D1 WCHA JR 40 8 18 26 0.650
2015-16 Bowling Green D1 WCHA SO 42 6 17 23 0.548
2014-15 Bowling Green D1 WCHA FR 39 2 17 19 0.487
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.40
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.49
2014-15 · Bowling Green
+21.1% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

⭐ Elite profile — high probability of D1 placement; comparable to top-end prospects
18%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
82%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#852
Defenseman overall
#241
Defenseman born in 1995

D2/3 Comparables

Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Filimon Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
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.