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

Grayson Badger Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-05-09 Country: USA
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
2021-22 Dexter NE-Prep 25 4 9 13 0.520 0.1467 0.1467 0.2380 0.2380
2022-23 — USHL 51 2 5 7 0.137 0.0844 0.0845 0.4045 0.4050
2023-24 Alberni Valley Bulldogs BCHL 52 11 26 37 0.712 0.2650 0.2591 1.0367 1.0135
2024-25 Alberni Valley Bulldogs BCHL 47 22 35 57 1.213 0.4518 0.4190 1.7672 1.6388
■ 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
2025-26 Northeastern D1 HockeyEast FR 5 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

38%
NCAA D1
10%
NCAA D2/D3
45%
Age-Out / Club
8%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#14847
Forward overall
#712
Forward born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Todd Skirving
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ RIT (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Carlos Amestoy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
Eric Scheid
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.94 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Shane Sooth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Andrew Rozak
SUNY Oswego · 2000-01
1.100 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Scott Hudson
Manhattanville · 2008-09
1.231 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Resch
Manhattanville · 2001-02
1.154 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.