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

Brandon Heck Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1984-10-29 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
2003-04 Winkler Flyers MJHL 57 36 35 71 1.246 0.2398 0.2397 0.7850 0.7847
2004-05 Drayton Valley Thunder AJHL 21 0 9 9 0.429 0.1438 0.1356 0.3972 0.3745
■ 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
2008-09 Castleton D3 — SR 25 11 18 29 1.160
2007-08 Castleton D3 — JR 26 16 18 34 1.308
2006-07 Castleton D3 — SO 27 14 19 33 1.222
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.22
2006-07 · Castleton
+705.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#24715
Forward overall
#697
Forward born in 1984

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jordan Zalba
Neumann · 2008-09
0.741 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Liam Feeney
Trinity · 2015-16
0.710 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ian Zaleski
Becker · 2018-19
0.476 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.