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

Mike Parnell Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1992-07-15 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
2010-11 — NAHL 39 2 7 9 0.231 0.0914 0.0956 0.2423 0.2534
2011-12 — NAHL 57 7 14 21 0.368 0.1460 0.1455 0.3868 0.3855
2012-13 — NAHL 41 7 8 15 0.366 0.1450 0.1372 0.3842 0.3636
■ 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
2016-17 Nichols D3 CNE — 27 4 4 8 0.296
2015-16 Nichols D3 CNE — 26 1 8 9 0.346
2014-15 Nichols D3 CNE — 16 1 1 2 0.125
2013-14 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 BigTen FR 1 0 0 0 0.000

NCAAe Rankings

#12523
Defenseman overall
#1497
Defenseman born in 1992
#4261
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 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
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Benjamin Gallacher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Michael Hollander
Becker · 2009-10
0.467 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ayrton Valente
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2013-14
0.542 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Alex Strand
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2015-16
0.440 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.