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

Ryan Busby Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1983-06-11 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
2000-01 Georgetown Raiders OJHL 49 13 26 39 0.796 0.1951 0.2017 0.5480 0.5665
2001-02 Georgetown Raiders OJHL 49 33 37 70 1.429 0.3501 0.3438 0.9836 0.9659
2002-03 Georgetown Raiders OJHL 49 38 53 91 1.857 0.4552 0.4282 1.2786 1.2027
■ 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
2006-07 SUNY Plattsburgh D3 SUNYAC SR 27 14 21 35 1.296
2005-06 SUNY Plattsburgh D3 SUNYAC JR 32 13 20 33 1.031
2004-05 SUNY Plattsburgh D3 SUNYAC SO 31 15 15 30 0.968
2003-04 SUNY Plattsburgh D3 SUNYAC FR 31 10 18 28 0.903
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.34
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.90
2003-04 · SUNY Plattsburgh
+167.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7507
Forward overall
#269
Forward born in 1983
#74
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Robbie Payne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.12 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jay Dickman
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Bemidji State
0.36 No data
NCAAe PPG
Brett Skibba
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ UConn (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Heinonen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG
John Simonson
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.97 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Matthew Fawcett
Salve Regina · 2018-19
1.259 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Louie Kamienski
Endicott · 2023-24
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Josh Maucieri
St. Thomas · 2018-19
0.800 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.