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

Adam McNabney Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2001-12-04 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 Holderness NE-Prep 30 2 6 8 0.267 0.0514 0.0514 0.1220 0.1220
2019-20 Holderness NE-Prep 28 2 11 13 0.464 0.0896 0.0896 0.2125 0.2125
2021-22 Boston Jr. Rangers EHL 40 2 7 9 0.225 0.0329 0.0327 0.1103 0.1096
■ 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
2025-26 Suffolk D3 CNE SR 1 0 0 0 0.000
2024-25 Suffolk D3 CNE JR 7 0 2 2 0.286
2023-24 Suffolk D3 CNE SO 14 2 1 3 0.214
2022-23 Suffolk D3 CNE FR 8 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

12%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#17843
Defenseman overall
#2823
Defenseman born in 2001

D1 Comparables

Kyle McKenzie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Fuller
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.11 PPG
→ Southern Maine (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Michael Thamert
Chatham · 2016-17
0.174 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew Stahel
Franklin Pierce · 2015-16
0.167 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Austin Wheatly
Becker · 2017-18
0.000 No data
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.