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

Reed Gregory Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-03-05 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
2011-12 — NA3HL 33 2 5 7 0.212 0.0266 0.0294 0.0670 0.0741
2014-15 — NOJHL 50 13 14 27 0.540 0.0902 0.0867 0.2248 0.2161
2015-16 Soo Eagles NOJHL 37 17 13 30 0.811 0.1354 0.1237 0.3375 0.3083
■ 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
2016-17 Lawrence D3 NCHA — 21 1 1 2 0.095
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.09
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.10
2016-17 · Lawrence
2.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#38836
Forward overall
#1616
Forward born in 1995

D1 Comparables

Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jared Domin
Adrian · 2017-18
0.429 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Rylan Burns
Amherst · 2004-05
0.625 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Besner
Bryn Athyn · 2016-17
0.300 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.