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 0.3643 0.3753 0.8302 0.8554
■ 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 — SR 28 9 14 23 0.821
2005-06 RPI D1 — JR 37 16 22 38 1.027
2004-05 RPI D1 — SO 27 6 14 20 0.741
2003-04 RPI D1 — FR 37 6 12 18 0.486
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.32
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.49
2003-04 · RPI
+51.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#10761
Forward overall
#333
Forward born in 1985
#259
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Tyler Motte
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Michigan (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Average
NCAAe PPG
Luke Stork
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Evan Allen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ Michigan (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Frederik Tiffels
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.66 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Mike Marnell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.49 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kim Hilmersson
Plymouth State · 2021-22
0.852 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Silcoff
Middlebury · 2010-11
0.960 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jake Howie
Marian · 2012-13
0.667 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.