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

Sam Becker Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1994-12-29 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
2013-14 — NAHL 41 5 11 16 0.390 0.1434 0.1461 0.4119 0.4197
2014-15 Minnesota Magicians NAHL 55 8 40 48 0.873 0.3206 0.3099 0.9211 0.8903
■ 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
2018-19 Maine D1 HockeyEast SR 36 1 7 8 0.222
2017-18 Maine D1 HockeyEast JR 6 0 2 2 0.333
2016-17 Maine D1 HockeyEast SO 29 0 4 4 0.138
2015-16 Maine D1 HockeyEast FR 31 0 3 3 0.097
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.23
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.10
2015-16 · Maine
-58.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3893
Defenseman overall
#749
Defenseman born in 1994
#1180
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Matt Van Voorhis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Barrett Kaib
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Providence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Fleming
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Victor Newell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Harvard (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Zach Heintz
Adrian · 2018-19
1.179 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Nicholas Bondra
Amherst · 2016-17
0.714 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Grant Everett
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2007-08
0.708 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.