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

Ryan Nick Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1993-05-13 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
2011-12 — NAHL 44 5 10 15 0.341 0.1266 0.1314 0.3609 0.3746
2012-13 Port Huron Fighting Falcons NAHL 60 1 25 26 0.433 0.1609 0.1589 0.4588 0.4531
■ 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 Army D1 AHA SR 35 3 10 13 0.371
2015-16 Army D1 AHA JR 38 7 11 18 0.474
2014-15 Army D1 AHA SO 32 1 5 6 0.188
2013-14 Army D1 AHA FR 28 0 4 4 0.143
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.14
2013-14 · Army
2.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7352
Defenseman overall
#1101
Defenseman born in 1993
#3293
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Dan Molenaar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average D
NCAAe PPG
James Roll
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Nick Neville
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.58 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Victor Björkung
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Johnny Hrabovsky
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Riley Meyer
Hamline · 2016-17
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
David Titanic
SUNY Oswego · 2009-10
0.333 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Jack Devine
Saint Anselm · 2021-22
0.364 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.