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

Marc Biggs Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1991-02-05 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
2010-11 Texas Tornado NAHL 47 15 17 32 0.681 0.2528 0.2462 0.7209 0.7020
2011-12 Texas Tornado NAHL 58 19 23 42 0.724 0.2689 0.2486 0.7667 0.7088
■ 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
2015-16 Salve Regina D3 CNE SR 28 11 7 18 0.643
2014-15 Salve Regina D3 CNE JR 23 10 13 23 1.000
2013-14 Salve Regina D3 CNE SO 24 8 14 22 0.917
2012-13 Salve Regina D3 CNE FR 26 15 10 25 0.962
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.96
2012-13 · Salve Regina
+353.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13430
Forward overall
#510
Forward born in 1991
#866
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Ricky DeRosa
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Aidan Cavallini
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Perry D'Arrisso
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.02 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Glenn Wiswell
Castleton · 2016-17
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jack Schlifke
Fredonia · 2021-22
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Gage Christianson
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2012-13
0.741 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.