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

Spencer MacLean Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-03-28 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
2014-15 Elliot Lake Vikings NOJHL 48 29 37 66 1.375 0.2318 0.2352 0.5713 0.5796
2015-16 Elliot Lake Vikings NOJHL 51 30 44 74 1.451 0.2446 0.2365 0.6029 0.5828
■ 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
2019-20 Elmira D3 UCHC SR 24 5 9 14 0.583
2018-19 Elmira D3 UCHC JR 15 2 5 7 0.467
2017-18 Elmira D3 UCHC SO 27 11 8 19 0.704
2016-17 Elmira D3 UCHC FR 19 6 4 10 0.526
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.53
2016-17 · Elmira
+160.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#15713
Forward overall
#631
Forward born in 1996
#43
in NOJHL

D1 Comparables

Gage Hough
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Poulsen
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.60 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Stanislav Dzakhov
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.69 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Average
NCAAe PPG
Evan Janssen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Denver (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Bauman
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.70 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Alex Laplante
New England College · 2017-18
0.704 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Tim Murphy
UMass Boston · 2014-15
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Bryan Black
SUNY Potsdam · 2007-08
0.818 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.