← New Search ↗ Social Card

Conor Landrigan Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-03-30 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
2013-14 Wilkes-Barre/Scranton Knights EHL 16 2 3 5 0.312 0.0722 0.0784 0.1529 0.1661
2015-16 Philadelphia Revolution EHL 13 1 2 3 0.231 0.0533 0.0531 0.1129 0.1124
2016-17 Bay State Bobcats NA3HL 45 52 70 122 2.711 0.3402 0.3137 0.8559 0.7892
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
2020-21 Utica D1 UCHC SR 10 9 15 24 2.400
2020-21 Utica D3 UCHC SR 10 9 15 24 2.400
2019-20 Utica D1 UCHC JR 22 13 28 41 1.864
2019-20 Utica D3 UCHC JR 22 13 28 41 1.864
2018-19 Utica D1 UCHC SO 28 10 12 22 0.786
2018-19 Utica D3 UCHC SO 28 10 12 22 0.786
2017-18 Utica D3 UCHC FR 26 14 13 27 1.038
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
Actual FR PPG
1.04
2017-18 · Utica
+479.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13273
Forward overall
#527
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

SUNY Cortland · 2010-11
0.640 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Westfield State · 2011-12
0.800 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Skidmore · 2023-24
0.778 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.