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

Troy Terry Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-09-10 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
2013-14 — USHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2014-15 — NTDP-U18 66 19 25 44 0.667 0.5170 0.5118 2.4814 2.4565
■ 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
2017-18 Denver D1 NCHC JR 39 14 34 48 1.231
2016-17 Denver D1 NCHC SO 35 22 23 45 1.286
2015-16 Denver D1 NCHC FR 41 9 13 22 0.537
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.48
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.54
2015-16 · Denver
+12.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#8121
Forward overall
#379
Forward born in 1997
#680
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Connor Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Hudson Fasching
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.53 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.75 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Karson Kuhlman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.56 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Weis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Newell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.59 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nick Ford
Elmira · 2014-15
0.800 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Joseph Fiorino
Southern New Hampshire · 2016-17
0.593 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Reifler
Elmira · 2016-17
1.067 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.