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

Ryan Spencer Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1987-11-03 Country: Canada
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
2006-07 Durham Fury OJHL 47 5 8 13 0.277 0.0678 0.0663 0.1893 0.1852
2007-08 Ontario Tech Univ. usports 25 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2008-09 Ontario Tech Univ. usports 28 2 4 6 0.214 — — — —
2009-10 Ontario Tech Univ. usports 28 0 6 6 0.214 — — — —
■ 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
2004-05 St. Mary's D3 — SR 16 1 3 4 0.250
2003-04 St. Mary's D3 — JR 6 1 0 1 0.167
2001-02 St. Mary's D3 — FR 11 2 0 2 0.182

NCAAe Rankings

#50224
Forward overall
#1655
Forward born in 1987

D1 Comparables

Sebastian Weberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Colgate
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Hynes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Union (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Conor Andrle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Army (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average
NCAAe PPG
Canon Pieper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Gareau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

David Ferreira
SUNY Oswego · 2012-13
0.143 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Kirk Golden
Hobart · 2003-04
0.250 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Chris Nathe
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2001-02
0.471 Average
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.