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

Ryan Smith Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-08-21 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
2013-14 Georgetown Raiders OJHL 53 10 28 38 0.717 0.1757 0.1629 0.4931 0.4573
■ 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
2017-18 Castleton D3 LittleEast SR 25 1 10 11 0.440
2016-17 Castleton D3 LittleEast JR 22 3 8 11 0.500
2015-16 Castleton D3 LittleEast SO 20 0 5 5 0.250
2014-15 Castleton D3 LittleEast FR 13 1 4 5 0.385
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.38
2014-15 · Castleton
+175.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#25982
Forward overall
#900
Forward born in 1993
#1234
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Justin Parizek
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Shaun Jameson
Wentworth · 2008-09
1.040 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Araujo
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2017-18
0.556 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tucker Shedd
Plymouth State · 2024-25
0.741 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.