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

Taylor Casey Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2005-12-12 Country: USA
SUNY Potsdam
SUNYAC D3

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
2024-25 — USPHL-Premier 32 10 16 26 0.812 0.1063 0.1070 0.2758 0.2776
2025-26 Northern Cyclones NCDC 53 11 12 23 0.434 0.1769 0.1722 0.3488 0.3395
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

18%
NCAA D1
25%
NCAA D2/D3
52%
Age-Out / Club
2%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#18044
Forward overall
#962
Forward born in 2005

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG

SUNY Potsdam Alumni similar profiles who attended this school

Devin Panzeca
0.67
actual FR PPG at SUNY Potsdam
Owen Watson
0.31
actual FR PPG at SUNY Potsdam
Brandon Couto
0.59
actual FR PPG at SUNY Potsdam
Steve Cornelissen
0.43
actual FR PPG at SUNY Potsdam

D2/3 Comparables

Matt Whitehead
SUNY Oswego · 2004-05
0.333 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
David MacGregor
UMass Boston · 2014-15
0.419 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Gieseler
Adrian · 2009-10
0.500 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.