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

Brendan Riley Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-03-29 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
2015-16 P.A.L. Junior Islanders USPHL-Premier-Classic 18 3 4 7 0.389 0.1092 0.1092 0.3198 0.3198
■ 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
2019-20 Mercyhurst D1 AHA SR 32 1 4 5 0.156
2018-19 Mercyhurst D1 AHA JR 35 1 4 5 0.143
2017-18 Mercyhurst D1 AHA SO 20 3 2 5 0.250
2016-17 Mercyhurst D1 AHA FR 4 0 1 1 0.250
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.09
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.25
2016-17 · Mercyhurst
+167.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#49321
Forward overall
#2297
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

Ben Ostlie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
William Messa
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Northeastern
0.12 No data
NCAAe PPG
Stanislav Dzakhov
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Hansen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.25 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brendan Bell
Hamilton · 2002-03
0.333 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Jameson Raymond
Lawrence · 2006-07
0.571 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tom Schmidt
Wisconsin-Stout · 2014-15
0.300 Developing
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.