← New Search ↗ Social Card

Sam Prpich Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1991-06-20 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
2008-09 Okotoks Oilers AJHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2009-10 — SJHL 3 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2010-11 Swan Valley Stampeders MJHL 20 1 1 2 0.100 0.0193 0.0191 0.0632 0.0625
2011-12 Neepawa Titans MJHL 23 7 10 17 0.739 0.1423 0.1336 0.4670 0.4385
■ 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
2015-16 Hamline D3 MIAC — 13 0 0 0 0.000
2014-15 Hamline D3 MIAC — 8 0 0 0 0.000
2013-14 Wisconsin-Superior D3 WIAC — 7 0 0 0 0.000
2012-13 Wisconsin-Superior D3 WIAC — 10 1 0 1 0.100
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.10
2012-13 · Wisconsin-Superior
+33.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#46604
Forward overall
#1671
Forward born in 1991
#1878
in AJHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Roger Williams · 2024-25
0.600 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Wesleyan · 2017-18
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Neumann · 2022-23
0.267 Developing
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.