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

Scott Reedy Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-04-04 Country: USA
2017 · Round 4, Pick #102  ·  San Jose Sharks San Jose Sharks
Signed Professionally

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
2015-16 — NTDP-U18 56 20 34 54 0.964 0.7168 0.7320 3.5982 3.6744
2016-17 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 60 22 20 42 0.700 0.5203 0.5058 2.6120 2.5391
■ 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
2020-21 Minnesota D1 BigTen SR 28 11 17 28 1.000
2019-20 Minnesota D1 BigTen JR 35 15 8 23 0.657
2018-19 Minnesota D1 BigTen SO 34 7 4 11 0.324
2017-18 Minnesota D1 BigTen FR 35 7 8 15 0.429
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.56
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.43
2017-18 · Minnesota
-22.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Tyler Motte
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Michigan (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average
NCAAe PPG
Sean Malone
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Harvard (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Gabe Guertler
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.85 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.53 Developing
NCAAe PPG
John Hayden
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.83 PPG
→ Yale (0.48 D1 FR PPG)
0.51 Average
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Weis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Sascha Figi
Fitchburg State · 2016-17
1.429 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Reifler
Elmira · 2017-18
1.067 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Rihards Marenis
Aurora · 2013-14
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.