← New Search ↗ Social Card

Brian Kang Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-03-17 Country: Canada
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
2004-05 Cowichan Valley Capitals BCHL 54 4 3 7 0.130 0.0499 0.0558 0.1888 0.2112
2005-06 Cowichan Valley Capitals BCHL 58 12 6 18 0.310 0.1196 0.1278 0.4521 0.4831
2006-07 Trail Smoke Eaters BCHL 59 19 16 35 0.593 0.2286 0.2320 0.8644 0.8772
2007-08 Merritt Centennials BCHL 53 13 18 31 0.585 0.2254 0.2166 0.8523 0.8190
2008-09 BCHL 56 11 13 24 0.429 0.1651 0.1517 0.6245 0.5739
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
2012-13 Concordia D3 MIAC SR 24 6 10 16 0.667
2011-12 Concordia D3 MIAC JR 24 3 6 9 0.375
2010-11 Concordia D3 MIAC SO 27 8 3 11 0.407
2009-10 Concordia D3 FR 25 5 3 8 0.320
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.32
2009-10 · Concordia
+110.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#29388
Forward overall
#1001
Forward born in 1988
#1625
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2011-12
0.862 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Geneseo · 2011-12
0.471 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Salem State · 2018-19
0.583 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.