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

Liam Gorman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2000-05-08 Country: USA
2018 NHL Draft Round 6, Pick #177  ·  Pittsburgh Penguins Pittsburgh Penguins
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
2017-18 Chicago Steel USHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2018-19 St. Sebastian’s NE-Prep 22 12 10 22 1.000 0.1929 0.1929 — —
■ 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
2023-24 UMass D1 HockeyEast — 28 1 3 4 0.143
2022-23 Princeton D1 ECAC — 32 12 12 24 0.750
2021-22 Princeton D1 ECAC — 28 3 3 6 0.214
2020-21 Princeton D1 ECAC — 0 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 Princeton D1 ECAC FR 31 1 5 6 0.194
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.19
2019-20 · Princeton
+17.2% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

2%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
85%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#17401
Forward overall
#761
Forward born in 2000
#1728
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Thomas Ebbing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ian Mansfield
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Army (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Fitzgerald
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.12 PPG
→ Boston College (0.72 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jake Horton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Harvard (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Mitch Hults
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Average
NCAAe 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.