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

Kevin Droddy Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1984-05-12 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
2002-03 North York Rangers OJHL 45 2 2 4 0.089 0.0218 0.0215 0.0612 0.0604
■ 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
2005-06 Neumann D3 MAC JR 16 1 2 3 0.188
2004-05 Neumann D3 MAC SO 19 2 1 3 0.158
2003-04 Neumann D3 MAC FR 7 0 2 2 0.286
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.02
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.29
2003-04 · Neumann
+1307.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#30291
Defenseman overall
#1690
Defenseman born in 1984
#5341
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Dylan Maller
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Phil Boje
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.10 PPG
→ Air Force (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Josh McArdle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Brown (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Chris Buchanan
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ Bentley (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Justin Wade
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.10 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Taylor Pickering
Canton · 2009-10
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Trent King
Franklin Pierce · 2021-22
0.241 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Holden Doggett
Norwich · 2018-19
0.111 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.