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

Connor Murphy Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-04-02 Country: Canada
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
2014-15 Chicago Steel USHL 60 13 20 33 0.550 0.3244 0.3236 1.6504 1.6462
2015-16 — USHL 58 12 12 24 0.414 0.2441 0.2321 1.2417 1.1809
■ 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
2018-19 Cornell D1 ECAC — 27 2 4 6 0.222
2017-18 Cornell D1 ECAC — 1 0 0 0 0.000
2016-17 Cornell D1 ECAC — 10 1 1 2 0.200
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.23
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.20
2016-17 · Cornell
-13.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#17440
Forward overall
#677
Forward born in 1996
#1859
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Gage Hough
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Evan Janssen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Denver (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tommy Schutt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eric Freschi
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.51 PPG
→ Cornell (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Tyler Ramm
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2022-23
0.588 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jake Fuss
University of New England · 2017-18
0.727 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jeremy Dawes
St. Scholastica · 2006-07
1.036 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.