← New Search ↗ Social Card

Grant Dardis Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-02-12 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
2019-20 Mahtomedi USHS-MN 31 0 11 11 0.355 0.0437 0.0437 0.0862 0.0862
2020-21 Mahtomedi USHS-MN 20 4 6 10 0.500 0.0616 0.0616 0.1215 0.1215
2021-22 Mahtomedi USHS-MN 31 5 16 21 0.677 0.0835 0.0835 0.1645 0.1645
2022-23 Rochester Grizzlies NA3HL 38 5 9 14 0.368 0.0407 0.0415 0.1167 0.1191
2023-24 Portage Terriers MJHL 54 10 11 21 0.389 0.0749 0.0724 0.2451 0.2370
2024-25 Portage Terriers MJHL 56 4 15 19 0.339 0.0653 0.0595 0.2138 0.1949
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
2025-26 Augsburg D3 MIAC SO 24 1 3 4 0.167
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.17
2025-26 · Augsburg
+173.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

10%
NCAA D1
15%
NCAA D2/D3
72%
Age-Out / Club
2%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#17843
Defenseman overall
#3258
Defenseman born in 2004

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ RIT (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Castleton · 2007-08
0.231 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Utica · 2017-18
0.778 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Bethel · 2024-25
0.000 No data
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.