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

Stephen Ginand Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1991-09-12 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 — AJHL 16 2 2 4 0.250 0.0838 0.0876 0.2314 0.2418
2010-11 Aberdeen Wings NAHL 3 1 1 2 0.667 0.2449 0.2458 0.7037 0.7064
■ 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
2012-13 UMass Dartmouth D3 HockeyEast SO 25 4 4 8 0.320
2011-12 UMass Dartmouth D3 ECAC FR 27 7 14 21 0.778
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.78
2011-12 · UMass Dartmouth
+351.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#19963
Defenseman overall
#1843
Defenseman born in 1991

D1 Comparables

Tommy Davis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Princeton (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Mike McKee
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Christian Neumann
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ UConn (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Murray
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Hamline (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Neal Goff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Russell Anderson
Utica · 2006-07
1.059 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Cam Collins
Saint Anselm · 2021-22
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Josh Ranalli
Adrian · 2009-10
0.577 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.