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

Mike Hull Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-01-10 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
2005-06 Indiana Ice USHL 51 9 10 19 0.372 0.2197 0.2293 1.1188 1.1678
2006-07 — USHL 48 4 8 12 0.250 0.1475 0.1464 0.7509 0.7452
2007-08 St. Louis Bandits NAHL 49 8 20 28 0.571 0.2099 0.2017 0.6031 0.5796
■ 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
2011-12 Army D1 AHA SR 34 8 17 25 0.735
2010-11 Army D1 AHA JR 32 8 21 29 0.906
2009-10 Army D1 AHA SO 36 8 20 28 0.778
2008-09 Army D1 AHA FR 33 5 12 17 0.515
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.52
2008-09 · Army
+235.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#27514
Forward overall
#937
Forward born in 1988

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
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Andrew Lay
Lawrence · 2011-12
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Brendan Logan
Aurora · 2015-16
0.417 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Will Baginski
King's · 2018-19
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.