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

Laine McKay Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-01-04 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 Hamilton Red Wings OJHL 51 22 26 48 0.941 0.2307 0.2409 0.6478 0.6765
2015-16 — USHL 27 4 5 9 0.333 0.1966 0.1944 1.0001 0.9890
2016-17 Markham Royals OJHL 50 22 32 54 1.080 0.2647 0.2500 0.7434 0.7020
■ 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 Merrimack D1 HockeyEast SO 17 2 1 3 0.176
2017-18 Merrimack D1 HockeyEast FR 19 1 3 4 0.210
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.21
2017-18 · Merrimack
+7.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#22003
Forward overall
#1018
Forward born in 1997
#946
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Siiro
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Princeton (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Average
NCAAe PPG
Joseph-Matthew Manno
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.63 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Connor Beatty
Endicott · 2018-19
1.333 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Chase Nieuwendyk
SUNY Brockport · 2010-11
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
P.A. Martineau
Hobart · 2016-17
0.357 Average
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.