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

Reilly Walsh Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1999-04-21 Country: USA
2017 · Round 3, Pick #81  ·  New Jersey Devils New Jersey Devils
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 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 9 3 3 6 0.667 0.4956 0.5073 2.4877 2.5462
2016-17 Chicago Steel USHL 24 2 8 10 0.417 0.2458 0.2587 1.2515 1.3172
■ 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 Harvard D1 ECAC JR 30 8 19 27 0.900
2018-19 Harvard D1 ECAC SO 33 12 19 31 0.939
2017-18 Harvard D1 ECAC FR 33 7 13 20 0.606
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.34
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.61
2017-18 · Harvard
+79.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Connor Clifton
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Luke Voltin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Murphy
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Northland (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Gross
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Michael Downing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ Michigan (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Bryce Grandbois
Worcester State · 2022-23
0.769 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nate Pionk
St. Scholastica · 2014-15
0.615 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jason Yuel
Curry · 2004-05
1.769 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.