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

Connor Faupel Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1992-07-20 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
2011-12 — MJHL 50 7 10 17 0.340 0.0655 0.0650 0.2144 0.2129
2012-13 Dauphin Kings MJHL 59 8 12 20 0.339 0.0653 0.0616 0.2138 0.2017
■ 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
2016-17 St. Scholastica D3 MIAC SR 25 0 7 7 0.280
2015-16 St. Scholastica D3 MIAC JR 17 1 2 3 0.176
2014-15 Wisconsin-Superior D3 BigTen SO 19 0 5 5 0.263
2013-14 Wisconsin-Superior D3 BigTen FR 18 3 1 4 0.222
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.22
2013-14 · Wisconsin-Superior
+274.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#18385
Defenseman overall
#1856
Defenseman born in 1992
#1387
in MJHL

D1 Comparables

William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Tyler Jensen
Lawrence · 2018-19
0.222 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Mark Phillips
Rivier · 2023-24
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael DeBello
Colby · 2011-12
0.200 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.