| Season | Team | League | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG | NCAAe-PPG | Age-Adj | D3e-PPG | Age-Adj |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-21 | — | NTDP-U18 | 47 | 30 | 28 | 58 | 1.234 | 0.9568 | 0.9568 | 4.5928 | 4.5928 |
| 2021-22 | — | NTDP-U18 | 56 | 28 | 42 | 70 | 1.250 | 0.9692 | 0.9335 | 4.6524 | 4.4809 |
| Season | School | Div | Conference | Year | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-24 | Michigan | D1 | BigTen | — | 41 | 17 | 24 | 41 | 1.000 |
| 2022-23 | Michigan | D1 | BigTen | — | 13 | 2 | 5 | 7 | 0.538 |
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.