← New Search ↗ Social Card

Eric Delong Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-10-15 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
2004-05 Portage Terriers MJHL 2 0 3 3 1.500 0.4078 0.4691 0.9453 1.0874
2005-06 Portage Terriers MJHL 24 7 13 20 0.833 0.2266 0.2490 0.5251 0.5770
2006-07 Portage Terriers MJHL 61 37 51 88 1.443 0.3922 0.4126 0.9091 0.9564
2007-08 Portage Terriers MJHL 60 30 50 80 1.333 0.3625 0.3618 0.8402 0.8386
2008-09 Portage Terriers MJHL 49 46 47 93 1.898 0.5161 0.4896 1.1961 1.1347
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
2012-13 Sacred Heart D1 AHA SR 36 13 19 32 0.889
2011-12 Sacred Heart D1 AHA JR 35 9 12 21 0.600
2010-11 Sacred Heart D1 AHA SO 37 9 21 30 0.811
2009-10 Sacred Heart D1 AHA FR 35 15 20 35 1.000
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.38
before college
Actual FR PPG
1.00
2009-10 · Sacred Heart
+166.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7262
Forward overall
#292
Forward born in 1988
#13
in MJHL

D1 Comparables

NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.14 PPG
→ UConn (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.27 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.18 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.45 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.89 PPG
→ Yale
0.50 No data
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.03 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Finlandia · 2013-14
0.409 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2004-05
0.850 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Buffalo State · 2006-07
0.731 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.