← New Search ↗ Social Card

Patrick Sexton Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1994-04-19 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
2010-11 Rockland Nationals CCHL 46 1 2 3 0.065 0.0141 0.0156 0.0504 0.0558
2011-12 Smiths Falls Bears CCHL 57 1 13 14 0.246 0.0533 0.0563 0.1900 0.2008
2012-13 Smiths Falls Bears CCHL 62 10 26 36 0.581 0.1259 0.1275 0.4492 0.4549
2013-14 Penticton Vees BCHL 58 3 6 9 0.155 0.0598 0.0582 0.2259 0.2199
2014-15 Penticton Vees BCHL 45 1 11 12 0.267 0.1028 0.0953 0.3881 0.3597
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
2017-18 Wisconsin D1 BigTen 0 0 0 0 0.000
2016-17 Wisconsin D1 BigTen SO 13 0 1 1 0.077
2015-16 Wisconsin D1 BigTen FR 20 0 1 1 0.050
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.05
2015-16 · Wisconsin
-34.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#16242
Defenseman overall
#1854
Defenseman born in 1994

D1 Comparables

QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ RIT (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

University of New England · 2018-19
0.647 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Concordia (WI) · 2021-22
0.346 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Oswego · 2016-17
0.440 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.