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

Oren Eizenman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1985-03-27 Country: Israel
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
2002-03 Wexford Raiders OJHL 47 25 32 57 1.213 0.2973 0.3063 0.8350 0.8603
■ 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 RPI D1 ECAC SR 28 9 14 23 0.821
2005-06 RPI D1 ECAC JR 37 16 22 38 1.027
2004-05 RPI D1 ECAC SO 27 6 14 20 0.741
2003-04 RPI D1 ECAC FR 37 6 12 18 0.486
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.26
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.49
2003-04 · RPI
+85.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11256
Forward overall
#355
Forward born in 1985
#222
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Luke Stork
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Polino
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.40 PPG
→ RPI (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Scott Conway
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Penn State (0.76 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Mike Marnell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.49 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average
NCAAe PPG
Garrett Gamez
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Providence (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chris Atkinson
Curry · 2005-06
0.962 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Silcoff
Middlebury · 2010-11
0.960 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Kim Hilmersson
Plymouth State · 2021-22
0.852 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.