icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG | NCAAe-PPG | Age-Adj | D3e-PPG | Age-Adj |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006-07 | Camrose Kodiaks | AJHL | 47 | 18 | 30 | 48 | 1.021 | 0.3389 | 0.3671 | 0.9465 | 1.0252 |
| 2007-08 | Camrose Kodiaks | AJHL | 37 | 25 | 41 | 66 | 1.784 | 0.5919 | 0.6084 | 1.6532 | 1.6994 |
| 2013-14 | Augsburger Panther | DEL | 52 | 14 | 28 | 42 | 0.808 | 0.8833 | 1.0495 | — | — |
| 2015-16 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 49 | 8 | 27 | 35 | 0.714 | 0.7812 | 0.8577 | — | — |
| 2016-17 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 52 | 9 | 39 | 48 | 0.923 | 1.0095 | 1.0891 | — | — |
| 2017-18 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 47 | 12 | 30 | 42 | 0.894 | 0.9772 | 1.0372 | — | — |
| 2018-19 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 52 | 15 | 37 | 52 | 1.000 | 1.0936 | 1.0614 | — | — |
| 2019-20 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 52 | 14 | 31 | 45 | 0.865 | 0.9464 | 0.9464 | — | — |
| 2020-21 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 23 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 0.217 | 0.2377 | 0.2377 | — | — |
| 2021-22 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 53 | 19 | 34 | 53 | 1.000 | 1.0936 | 0.8651 | — | — |
| 2022-23 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 50 | 16 | 22 | 38 | 0.760 | 0.8311 | 0.6330 | — | — |
| 2023-24 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 52 | 11 | 34 | 45 | 0.865 | 0.9464 | 0.6723 | — | — |
| 2024-25 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 43 | 11 | 21 | 32 | 0.744 | 0.8139 | 0.5408 | — | — |
| Season | School | Div | Conference | Year | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012-13 | Buffalo State | D3 | — | JR | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.500 |
| 2011-12 | Buffalo State | D3 | — | SO | 14 | 5 | 2 | 7 | 0.500 |
| 2010-11 | Buffalo State | D3 | — | FR | 17 | 5 | 2 | 7 | 0.412 |
| 2010-11 | Minnesota Duluth | D1 | WCHA-orig | — | 42 | 28 | 26 | 54 | 1.286 |
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.