| Season | Team | League | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG | NCAAe-PPG | Age-Adj | D3e-PPG | Age-Adj |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013-14 | — | NTDP-U18 | 52 | 20 | 19 | 39 | 0.750 | 0.5816 | 0.6107 | 2.7914 | 2.9311 |
| 2014-15 | — | NTDP-U18 | 61 | 27 | 15 | 42 | 0.689 | 0.5339 | 0.5348 | 2.5625 | 2.5667 |
| Season | School | Div | Conference | Year | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-17 | Wisconsin | D1 | BigTen | SO | 35 | 22 | 16 | 38 | 1.086 |
| 2015-16 | Wisconsin | D1 | BigTen | FR | 34 | 19 | 13 | 32 | 0.941 |
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.