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

Nick Greene Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-11-07 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
2014-15 Minnetonka High USHS-MN 25 12 5 17 0.680 0.0861 0.0804 0.1651 0.1541
2015-16 Yellowstone Quake NA3HL 46 23 27 50 1.087 0.1385 0.1389 0.3438 0.3448
■ 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 Gustavus Adolphus D3 MIAC — 20 1 2 3 0.150
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.10
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.15
2016-17 · Gustavus Adolphus
+51.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#25127
Forward overall
#1012
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

Tyler Hynes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Union (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sebastian Weberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Colgate
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Gareau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Canon Pieper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kenny Gillespie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ RPI (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mario Tropea
Neumann · 2016-17
0.583 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Akezhan Melis
Albertus Magnus · 2022-23
0.167 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Chad Bennett
Fredonia · 2010-11
0.353 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.