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

Andrew MacWilliam Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1990-03-25 Country: Canada
2008 · Round 6, Pick #188  ·  Toronto Maple Leafs Toronto Maple Leafs
Signed Professionally
EHC München · DEL

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
2006-07 Camrose Kodiaks AJHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2007-08 Camrose Kodiaks AJHL 54 0 13 13 0.241 0.0807 0.0859 0.2227 0.2370
2008-09 Camrose Kodiaks AJHL 57 8 21 29 0.509 0.1707 0.1746 0.4708 0.4814
2020-21 EHC München DEL 38 2 10 12 0.316 0.7895 0.7895 2.6774 2.6774
2021-22 EHC München DEL 26 0 4 4 0.154 0.3845 0.3181 1.3039 1.0788
2023-24 EHC München DEL 41 0 3 3 0.073 0.1830 0.1366 0.6206 0.4633
■ 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
2012-13 North Dakota D1 WCHA-orig SR 41 2 11 13 0.317
2011-12 North Dakota D1 WCHA-orig JR 42 2 5 7 0.167
2010-11 North Dakota D1 WCHA-orig SO 37 0 8 8 0.216
2009-10 North Dakota D1 NCHC FR 43 0 3 3 0.070
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.07
2009-10 · North Dakota
-46.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

2%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
98%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#9109
Defenseman overall
#1222
Defenseman born in 1990

D2/3 Comparables

Mike Connolly
Buffalo State · 2021-22
0.412 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Teddy Purcell
SUNY Geneseo · 2017-18
0.550 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Rihards Marenis
Aurora · 2022-23
1.000 Elite
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.