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

Derek Grogan Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1987-11-18 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
2006-07 — NAHL 58 7 18 25 0.431 0.1531 0.1535 0.4525 0.4538
2007-08 Marquette Rangers NAHL 57 15 19 34 0.597 0.2119 0.2021 0.6263 0.5973
■ 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
2011-12 St. Olaf D3 MIAC — 28 7 14 21 0.750
2010-11 St. Olaf D3 MIAC — 25 8 9 17 0.680
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.68
2010-11 · St. Olaf
+294.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6097
Defenseman overall
#844
Defenseman born in 1987
#2191
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG
Matt Van Voorhis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Gage Dill
Curry · 2021-22
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Bradley Tierney
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2008-09
0.963 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Payton Baldillez
Norwich · 2013-14
0.417 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.