← New Search ↗ Social Card

Michael Redmon Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1998-05-17 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 Nashville Jr. Predators NA3HL 35 8 9 17 0.486 0.0610 0.0658 0.1533 0.1654
2016-17 Nashville Jr. Predators NA3HL 45 23 33 56 1.244 0.1562 0.1607 0.3929 0.4041
2017-18 Winkler Flyers MJHL 11 1 1 2 0.182 0.0350 0.0344 0.1146 0.1125
2018-19 Lone Star Brahmas NAHL 8 0 0 0 0.000
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
2022-23 Augsburg D3 MIAC SR 28 5 6 11 0.393
2021-22 Augsburg D3 MIAC JR 30 0 8 8 0.267
2020-21 Augsburg D1 MIAC SO 5 0 2 2 0.400
2020-21 Augsburg D3 MIAC SO 5 0 2 2 0.400
2019-20 Augsburg D1 MIAC FR 26 5 7 12 0.462
2019-20 Augsburg D3 MIAC FR 26 5 7 12 0.462
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.46
2019-20 · Augsburg
+504.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

8%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
88%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#25475
Forward overall
#1251
Forward born in 1998

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Northeastern
0.12 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.25 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Salem State · 2005-06
0.353 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Curry · 2023-24
0.200 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2015-16
0.172 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.