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

Brett Gruber Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-01-18 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
2014-15 Victoria Grizzlies BCHL 57 35 32 67 1.175 0.4575 0.4641 1.7141 1.7388
2015-16 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 60 10 25 35 0.583 0.3714 0.3494 1.7480 1.6444
■ 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
2019-20 Arizona State D1 — SR 31 6 10 16 0.516
2018-19 Arizona State D1 — JR 35 7 14 21 0.600
2017-18 Arizona State D1 — SO 34 5 20 25 0.735
2016-17 Arizona State D1 — FR 32 5 9 14 0.438
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.34
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.44
2016-17 · Arizona State
+29.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5119
Forward overall
#196
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

Ryan Siiro
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Princeton (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Gerald Mayhew
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.56 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Evan Ritt
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Denver
0.24 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jordan Reed
Curry · 2009-10
0.885 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Rusty Masters
Elmira · 2005-06
0.962 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Eric Selleck
SUNY Oswego · 2007-08
1.000 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.