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

Micky Knox Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-11-15 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
2009-10 North Iowa Outlaws NAHL 55 15 15 30 0.545 0.2025 0.2052 0.5776 0.5854
2010-11 Coulee Region Chill NAHL 57 20 23 43 0.754 0.2801 0.2696 0.7988 0.7689
■ 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
2013-14 Wisconsin-Stout D3 BigTen JR 11 0 0 0 0.000
2012-13 Wisconsin-Stout D3 — SO 17 1 0 1 0.059
2011-12 Wisconsin-Stout D3 — FR 14 2 4 6 0.429
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.43
2011-12 · Wisconsin-Stout
+105.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#14769
Forward overall
#634
Forward born in 1990
#1045
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ian Miller
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Doucet
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Air Force (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Vincent Dekumbis
Lawrence · 2017-18
0.652 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Cullen Kane
Lake Forest · 2017-18
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Andy Nelson
Bowdoin · 2002-03
0.714 Strong
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.