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

William Falconer Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-06-27 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 Minnesota Moose NA3HL 46 10 26 36 0.783 0.0982 0.0971 0.2471 0.2443
2023-24 Minnesota Moose NA3HL 42 8 26 34 0.809 0.1016 0.0956 — —
■ 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 University of Mary ACHA_D1 — — 39 5 13 18 0.462
2024-25 University of Mary ACHA_D1 — — 39 5 13 18 0.462
2023-24 University of Mary ACHA_D1 — — 39 5 13 18 0.462
2022-23 University of Mary ACHA_D1 — — 39 5 13 18 0.462
2021-22 University of Mary ACHA_D1 — — 39 5 13 18 0.462
2020-21 University of Mary ACHA_D1 — — 39 5 13 18 0.462

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

25%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#7913
Defenseman overall
#1831
Defenseman born in 2003

D1 Comparables

Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brian Patterson
Suffolk · 2015-16
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Mitch Amatto
St. Norbert · 2013-14
0.400 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Thompson
SUNY Potsdam · 2010-11
0.435 Average
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.