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

Grant Besse Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-07-14 Country: USA
2013 · Round 5, Pick #147  ·  Anaheim Ducks Anaheim Ducks
Signed Professionally
Tölzer Löwen · DEL2

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
2012-13 Omaha Lancers USHL 7 4 0 4 0.571 0.3371 0.3396 1.7161 1.7288
2019-20 Krefeld Pinguine DEL 48 20 16 36 0.750 1.8750 1.8750 6.3586 6.3586
2020-21 IF Björklöven Allsvenskan 8 0 2 2 0.250 0.6250 0.6250 2.3455 2.3455
2021-22 Tölzer Löwen DEL2 17 5 9 14 0.824 1.1032 1.1601 1.4777 1.5538
■ 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 Wisconsin D1 BigTen SR 35 9 19 28 0.800
2015-16 Wisconsin D1 BigTen JR 35 11 22 33 0.943
2014-15 Wisconsin D1 BigTen SO 32 11 11 22 0.688
2013-14 Wisconsin D1 BigTen FR 36 8 6 14 0.389
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.29
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.39
2013-14 · Wisconsin
+33.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

🏒 NHL / Pro Track — production profile is consistent with players who bypassed or minimized college hockey
0%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
100%
NHL / Pro

NCAAe Rankings

#4847
Forward overall
#240
Forward born in 1994

D2/3 Comparables

Ryan Bloom
University of New England · 2016-17
1.654 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Shaquille Merasty
Adrian · 2015-16
1.357 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Peter Magagna
SUNY Oswego · 2004-05
0.926 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.