| 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 | 0.3425 | 0.3710 | 0.9451 | 1.0237 |
| 2007-08 | Camrose Kodiaks | AJHL | 37 | 25 | 41 | 66 | 1.784 | 0.5983 | 0.6150 | 1.6507 | 1.6968 |
| 2013-14 | Augsburger Panther | DEL | 52 | 14 | 28 | 42 | 0.808 | 2.0192 | 2.3991 | 6.8478 | 8.1360 |
| 2015-16 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 49 | 8 | 27 | 35 | 0.714 | 1.7858 | 1.9608 | 6.0560 | 6.6493 |
| 2016-17 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 52 | 9 | 39 | 48 | 0.923 | 2.3077 | 2.4897 | 7.8262 | 8.4434 |
| 2017-18 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 47 | 12 | 30 | 42 | 0.894 | 2.2340 | 2.3711 | 7.5761 | 8.0409 |
| 2018-19 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 52 | 15 | 37 | 52 | 1.000 | 2.5000 | 2.4263 | 8.4782 | 8.2282 |
| 2019-20 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 52 | 14 | 31 | 45 | 0.865 | 2.1635 | 2.1635 | 7.3370 | 7.3370 |
| 2020-21 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 23 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 0.217 | 0.5435 | 0.5435 | 1.8432 | 1.8432 |
| 2021-22 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 53 | 19 | 34 | 53 | 1.000 | 2.5000 | 1.9777 | 8.4782 | 6.7069 |
| 2022-23 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 50 | 16 | 22 | 38 | 0.760 | 1.9000 | 1.4471 | 6.4434 | 4.9075 |
| 2023-24 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 52 | 11 | 34 | 45 | 0.865 | 2.1635 | 1.5368 | 7.3370 | 5.2118 |
| 2024-25 | Straubing Tigers | DEL | 43 | 11 | 21 | 32 | 0.744 | 1.8605 | 1.2361 | 6.3095 | 4.1921 |
| Season | School | Div | Conference | Year | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2012-13 | Buffalo State | D3 | SUNYAC | JR | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.500 |
| 2011-12 | Buffalo State | D3 | SUNYAC | SO | 14 | 5 | 2 | 7 | 0.500 |
| 2010-11 | Buffalo State | D3 | SUNYAC | 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.