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

Derek Grant Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-04-20 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
2007-08 Langley Rivermen BCHL 57 24 39 63 1.105 0.4117 0.4387 1.6105 1.7161
2008-09 Langley Rivermen BCHL 35 25 35 60 1.714 0.6386 0.6537 2.4979 2.5568
■ 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
2010-11 Michigan D1 CCHA-orig — 38 8 25 33 0.868
2010-11 Michigan State D1 BigTen SO 38 8 25 33 0.868
2009-10 Michigan State D1 BigTen FR 38 12 18 30 0.789
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.53
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.79
2009-10 · Michigan State
+49.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#4633
Forward overall
#224
Forward born in 1990
#31
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

Dennis Kravchenko
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ UMass (0.92 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Toninato
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.09 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.67 Average
NCAAe PPG
Peter Quenneville
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.80 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Frank Vatrano
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ UMass
0.61 No data
NCAAe PPG
Nick Schilkey
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.70 D1 FR PPG)
0.74 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Rihards Marenis
Aurora · 2013-14
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Lucas Signoretti
Buffalo State · 2023-24
1.120 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Reifler
Elmira · 2017-18
1.067 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.