| Season | Team | League | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG | NCAAe-PPG | Age-Adj | D3e-PPG | Age-Adj |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012-13 | Muskegon Lumberjacks | USHL | 17 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 0.176 | 0.1041 | 0.1092 | 0.5301 | 0.5561 |
| 2013-14 | Muskegon Lumberjacks | USHL | 51 | 14 | 15 | 29 | 0.569 | 0.3354 | 0.3362 | 1.7077 | 1.7115 |
| 2014-15 | Central Illinois Flying Aces | USHL | 51 | 14 | 23 | 37 | 0.726 | 0.4280 | 0.4079 | 2.1790 | 2.0768 |
| Season | School | Div | Conference | Year | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-18 | Penn State | D1 | BigTen | — | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.000 |
| 2016-17 | Penn State | D1 | BigTen | SO | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.000 |
| 2015-16 | Penn State | D1 | BigTen | FR | 27 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0.111 |
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.