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

Ross Goff Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1983-03-15 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
2001-02 West Kelowna Warriors BCHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2002-03 Nanaimo Clippers BCHL 45 6 8 14 0.311 0.1199 0.1150 0.4521 0.4337
■ 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
2007-08 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC SR 17 1 2 3 0.176
2006-07 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC JR 20 2 6 8 0.400
2005-06 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC SO 23 6 4 10 0.435
2004-05 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC FR 21 1 9 10 0.476
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2004-05 · Fitchburg State
+338.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#14745
Defenseman overall
#1191
Defenseman born in 1983
#2477
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

Johnny Hrabovsky
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Aleksi Rossi
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ Brown
0.08 No data
NCAAe PPG
Vinny Muto
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Niagara (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Parker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Joseph Fiala
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brendan Meyer
Becker · 2018-19
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Nick Berst
Buffalo State · 2011-12
0.522 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Adam Fauchoux
Concordia (WI) · 2013-14
0.600 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.