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

Rhys Medved Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2008-01-30 Country: USA
Maine
HockeyEast D1

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
2025-26 Danbury Jr. Hat Tricks NAHL 42 3 6 9 0.214 0.0787 0.0851 0.2262 0.2447
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

8%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
12%
Age-Out / Club
72%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#19345
Defenseman overall
#1017
Defenseman born in 2008
#5692
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Alex Smith
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Alec McCrea
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Cornell (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Clint Lewis
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Cornell (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
David Drake
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ UConn (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Steven Santini
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Boston College (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

Maine Alumni similar profiles who attended this school

Keith Muehlbauer
USHS-MN 2014-15
0.04
actual FR PPG at Maine
Adrien Bisson
CCHL 2016-17
0.21
actual FR PPG at Maine
Cameron Spicer
EHL 2013-14
0.00
actual FR PPG at Maine
Loic Usereau
QMJHL 2022-23
0.23
actual FR PPG at Maine

D2/3 Comparables

Gage Christianson
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2009-10
0.741 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Matthew Vander Vort
Amherst · 2022-23
0.476 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Payden Benning
Curry · 2005-06
1.074 Elite
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.