← New Search ↗ Social Card

Eric Smith Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1991-08-13 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
2009-10 Winkler Flyers MJHL 4 0 2 2 0.500 0.1359 0.1420 0.3151 0.3293
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
2001-02 St. Norbert D3 FR 4 2 1 3 0.750

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Michigan (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.10 PPG
→ Air Force (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Boston University (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Canisius (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Wisconsin-Stout · 2015-16
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
St. Thomas · 2016-17
0.759 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Utica · 2015-16
0.350 Average
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.