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

Andrew Rygiel Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1987-01-03 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
2005-06 St. Michael's Buzzers OJHL 49 18 28 46 0.939 0.2820 0.2782 0.6426 0.6340
2006-07 St. Michael's Buzzers OJHL 48 18 16 34 0.708 0.2128 0.1993 0.4848 0.4540
■ 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
2010-11 SUNY Geneseo D3 — SR 26 5 6 11 0.423
2009-10 SUNY Geneseo D3 — JR 18 0 6 6 0.333
2008-09 SUNY Geneseo D3 — SO 25 3 6 9 0.360
2007-08 SUNY Geneseo D3 — FR 22 4 4 8 0.364
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.36
2007-08 · SUNY Geneseo
+84.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#22267
Forward overall
#731
Forward born in 1987
#1201
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Siiro
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Princeton (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Niko Happo
Manhattanville · 2016-17
0.518 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tristan Simm
Chatham · 2016-17
0.480 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Colton Friesen
Wisconsin-Superior · 2021-22
0.759 Strong
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.