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

Brett Gravelle Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-12-06 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
2014-15 Minnesota Wilderness NAHL 15 3 2 5 0.333 0.1238 0.1255 0.3529 0.3576
2015-16 Mason City Toros NA3HL 43 57 42 99 2.302 0.2774 0.2654 — —
■ 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
2019-20 St. Thomas D3 — SR 24 9 19 28 1.167
2018-19 St. Thomas D3 — JR 26 18 13 31 1.192
2017-18 St. Thomas D3 — SO 26 14 16 30 1.154
2016-17 St. Thomas D3 — FR 26 9 15 24 0.923
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.92
2016-17 · St. Thomas
+414.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#18738
Forward overall
#721
Forward born in 1995
#1668
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Sebastian Weberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Colgate
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG
Canon Pieper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Hynes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Union (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Himley
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Austin Vieth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jacob Halvorson
Wisconsin-Stout · 2018-19
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew Bechard
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2017-18
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Colin Larkin
UMass Boston · 2012-13
1.000 Elite
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.