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

Mike Krieg Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1990-01-08 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 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 54 2 18 20 0.370 0.1361 0.1321 0.3910 0.3797
2010-11 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 57 6 28 34 0.597 0.2192 0.2017 0.6296 0.5793
■ 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
2014-15 St. Thomas D3 CCHA SR 19 3 7 10 0.526
2013-14 St. Thomas D3 CCHA JR 27 3 7 10 0.370
2012-13 St. Thomas D3 CCHA SO 26 6 9 15 0.577
2011-12 St. Thomas D3 CCHA FR 26 2 8 10 0.385
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.38
2011-12 · St. Thomas
+134.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6720
Defenseman overall
#1022
Defenseman born in 1990
#2410
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Michael Holland
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ RIT (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Franco Loparco
Concordia · 2012-13
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Dan Sherer
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2012-13
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
John Doyle
SUNY Morrisville · 2012-13
0.875 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.