← New Search ↗ Social Card

Brandon Nowakowski Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1989-09-06 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
2007-08 Calgary Royals AJHL 60 10 17 27 0.450 0.1509 0.1565 0.4171 0.4325
2008-09 Calgary Royals AJHL 58 8 30 38 0.655 0.2198 0.2188 0.6072 0.6043
2009-10 Calgary Royals AJHL 56 21 31 52 0.929 0.3115 0.2941 0.8606 0.8125
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
2013-14 St. Scholastica D3 SR 28 16 13 29 1.036
2012-13 St. Scholastica D3 JR 28 17 11 28 1.000
2011-12 St. Scholastica D3 SO 27 11 9 20 0.741
2010-11 St. Scholastica D3 FR 18 0 4 4 0.222
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.23
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.22
2010-11 · St. Scholastica
-1.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#21999
Forward overall
#732
Forward born in 1989
#562
in AJHL

D1 Comparables

NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Denver (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.03 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.14 PPG
→ UConn (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.18 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Wisconsin-River Falls · 2006-07
0.741 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Oswego · 2018-19
0.773 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
UMass Boston · 2016-17
1.296 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.