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

Andrew Miller Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-10-04 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
2018-19 Connecticut Nighthawks USPHL-Premier 42 6 7 13 0.309 0.0405 0.0405 0.1050 0.1050
2019-20 Worcester Jr. Railers EHL 39 11 11 22 0.564 0.1303 0.1303 0.2760 0.2760
■ 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
2023-24 Framingham State D3 MASCAC SR 12 0 0 0 0.000
2022-23 Framingham State D3 MASCAC JR 9 0 0 0 0.000
2021-22 Framingham State D3 MASCAC SO 11 1 1 2 0.182
2020-21 Framingham State D3 MASCAC FR 0 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

8%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Club / ACHA
48%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#35427
Forward overall
#1925
Forward born in 1999

D1 Comparables

Conor Andrle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Army (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Hynes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Union (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sebastian Weberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Colgate
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Josh Erickson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Canon Pieper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Frank Pew
Neumann · 2001-02
0.333 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
David Robertson
Norwich · 2013-14
0.280 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Evan Butcher
Wisconsin-Stout · 2015-16
0.240 Developing
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.