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

Brody Simko Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-07-12 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
2022-23 Maryland Black Bears NAHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2023-24 Ogden Mustangs NCDC 49 23 20 43 0.878 0.3578 0.3580 0.7054 0.7058
2024-25 Ogden Mustangs NCDC 52 27 34 61 1.173 0.4783 0.4573 0.9429 0.9015
■ 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
2025-26 Trine D3 NCHA FR 28 12 22 34 1.214
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.36
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.21
2025-26 · Trine
+239.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

48%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#3550
Forward overall
#69
Forward born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Brandon Wahlin
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.33 PPG
→ UMass (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Michael Huntebrinker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.49 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tim Bonner
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.89 PPG
→ Yale
0.48 No data
NCAAe PPG
Jared VanWormer
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.27 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Developing
NCAAe PPG
T.J. Sarcona
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.06 PPG
→ Niagara (0.58 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Scott Schroeder
Norwich · 2008-09
0.737 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew Romano
SUNY Geneseo · 2015-16
0.963 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Beau Orser
SUNY Oswego · 2012-13
0.714 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.