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

Carson Kelley Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-02-19 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
2015-16 Lone Star Brahmas NAHL 52 8 8 16 0.308 0.1142 0.1118 0.3258 0.3191
2016-17 Lone Star Brahmas NAHL 57 16 34 50 0.877 0.3257 0.3013 0.9288 0.8592
■ 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 SUNY Geneseo D3 — JR 25 12 10 22 0.880
2018-19 SUNY Geneseo D3 — SO 29 5 8 13 0.448
2017-18 SUNY Geneseo D3 — FR 28 10 8 18 0.643
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.64
2017-18 · SUNY Geneseo
+233.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#15796
Forward overall
#636
Forward born in 1996
#1204
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Ricky DeRosa
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Walchuk
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Average
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

Mitchell Parsons
SUNY Brockport · 2017-18
0.577 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Cole Woodliffe
Northland · 2017-18
0.875 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Mike McPherson
Plymouth State · 2017-18
0.333 Developing
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.