← New Search ↗ Social Card

Michael McChesney Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1998-02-03 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
2016-17 Estevan Bruins SJHL 56 21 20 41 0.732 0.1876 0.1918 0.5519 0.5643
2017-18 Estevan Bruins SJHL 54 30 29 59 1.093 0.2799 0.2733 0.8236 0.8042
2018-19 Estevan Bruins SJHL 54 31 30 61 1.130 0.2894 0.2677 0.8515 0.7875
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
2022-23 St. Norbert D3 NCHA SR 24 16 18 34 1.417
2021-22 St. Norbert D3 NCHA JR 28 12 11 23 0.821
2020-21 St. Norbert D3 NCHA SO 0 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 St. Norbert D1 NCHA FR 27 3 6 9 0.333
2019-20 St. Norbert D3 NCHA FR 27 3 6 9 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.23
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2019-20 · St. Norbert
+44.2% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

55%
NCAA D1
8%
NCAA D2/D3
32%
Age-Out / Club
5%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#14946
Forward overall
#688
Forward born in 1998
#111
in SJHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chatham · 2024-25
1.037 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Cortland · 2010-11
0.640 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Wentworth · 2000-01
1.069 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.