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

Cam Clarke Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1996-05-15 Country: USA
2016 · Round 5, Pick #136  ·  Boston Bruins Boston Bruins
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
2015-16 Lone Star Brahmas NAHL 59 9 41 50 0.848 0.3114 0.3086 0.8945 0.8865
■ 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 Ferris State D1 WCHA — 27 1 6 7 0.259
2018-19 Ferris State D1 WCHA — 34 0 8 8 0.235
2017-18 Ferris State D1 WCHA — 30 1 6 7 0.233
2016-17 Ferris State D1 WCHA — 35 1 10 11 0.314
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.29
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.31
2016-17 · Ferris State
+7.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2526
Defenseman overall
#512
Defenseman born in 1996
#474
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Christopher Dienes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Jared Kolquist
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Tucker Poolman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Niklas Nevalainen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Connor Murphy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Cornell (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Riley Storzuk
Concordia · 2011-12
0.704 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Luc Malkhassian
Middlebury · 2024-25
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
John Moncovich
Utica · 2017-18
0.864 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.