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

Brandon Reinholz Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-02-16 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
2012-13 Johnstown Tomahawks NAHL 53 19 13 32 0.604 0.2242 0.2188 0.6393 0.6239
2013-14 Johnstown Tomahawks NAHL 59 18 21 39 0.661 0.2454 0.2272 0.6999 0.6479
■ 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
2017-18 Hamline D3 MIAC SR 25 10 8 18 0.720
2016-17 Hamline D3 MIAC JR 26 5 8 13 0.500
2015-16 Hamline D3 MIAC SO 27 1 1 2 0.074
2014-15 Hamline D3 MIAC FR 29 6 16 22 0.759
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.76
2014-15 · Hamline
+295.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#16005
Forward overall
#601
Forward born in 1993
#1238
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Ricky DeRosa
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
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
Perry D'Arrisso
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.02 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mark Menzies
St. Scholastica · 2004-05
0.769 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Logan Ganz
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2024-25
0.840 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Tanner Froese
St. Norbert · 2013-14
0.615 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.