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

Will Brophy Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1996-08-09 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
2015-16 Islanders Hockey Club USPHL-Premier-Classic 38 8 27 35 0.921 0.2586 0.2633 0.7573 0.7710
■ 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
2019-20 Holy Cross D1 AHA SR 37 3 6 9 0.243
2018-19 Holy Cross D1 AHA JR 31 0 4 4 0.129
2017-18 Holy Cross D1 AHA SO 25 1 2 3 0.120
2016-17 Holy Cross D1 AHA FR 22 0 1 1 0.045
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.25
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.05
2016-17 · Holy Cross
-81.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#4291
Defenseman overall
#806
Defenseman born in 1996
#42
in USPHL-Premier-Classic

D1 Comparables

Mike McKee
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Tommy Davis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Princeton (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Niklas Nevalainen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Christian Neumann
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ UConn (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Tucker Poolman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jacob Mooney
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2009-10
0.630 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Cade Baker
Endicott · 2022-23
0.625 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Lucas Van Natter
Manhattanville · 2008-09
0.857 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.