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

R.J. Gicewicz Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1995-11-13 Country: USA
No commitment set

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 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 3 0 1 1 0.333 0.2122 0.2279 0.9988 1.0728
2013-14 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 41 0 4 4 0.098 0.0622 0.0639 0.2925 0.3005
2014-15 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 49 0 5 5 0.102 0.0650 0.0636 0.3057 0.2990
■ 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 St. Lawrence D1 ECAC SO 2 0 0 0 0.000
2015-16 St. Lawrence D1 ECAC FR 9 0 2 2 0.222
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.22
2015-16 · St. Lawrence
+269.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#18421
Defenseman overall
#2097
Defenseman born in 1995
#4223
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Mike Preston
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.07 PPG
→ Army (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Cliff Watson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Eric Schurhamer
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Maine (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Richard Buri
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.04 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.03 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Neal Goff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Damien Kulynych
Fredonia · 2012-13
0.450 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kyle Hall
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2011-12
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Gerald Owen
Becker · 2010-11
0.952 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.