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

Garrett Roe Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-02-22 Country: USA
2008 · Round 6, Pick #183  ·  Los Angeles Kings Los Angeles Kings
Signed Professionally
Linköping HC · SHL

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
2004-05 Indiana Ice USHL 49 6 15 21 0.429 0.2528 0.2786 1.2873 1.4187
2005-06 Indiana Ice USHL 49 21 32 53 1.082 0.6380 0.6697 3.2485 3.4099
2006-07 Indiana Ice USHL 57 24 39 63 1.105 0.6520 0.6509 3.3197 3.3141
2014-15 EHC München DEL 51 13 38 51 1.000 2.5000 2.7045 8.4782 9.1716
2015-16 Linköping HC SHL 41 14 27 41 1.000 2.5000 2.2678 13.0486 11.8364
2016-17 Linköping HC SHL 49 16 21 37 0.755 1.8878 1.6017 9.8530 8.3595
■ 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
2010-11 St. Cloud State D1 WCHA-orig SR 38 10 26 36 0.947
2009-10 St. Cloud State D1 NCHC JR 41 20 29 49 1.195
2008-09 St. Cloud State D1 NCHC SO 38 17 31 48 1.263
2007-08 St. Cloud State D1 NCHC FR 39 18 27 45 1.154
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.61
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.15
2007-08 · St. Cloud State
+88.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#141
Forward overall
#2
Forward born in 1988

D2/3 Comparables

Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Osmundson
Utica · 2018-19
1.448 Elite
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.