← New Search ↗ Social Card

Derrick LaPoint Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1988-05-13 Country: USA
2006 · Round 4, Pick #116  ·  Florida Panthers Florida Panthers
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 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 59 13 36 49 0.831 0.4899 0.4945 2.4943 2.5176
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 North Dakota D1 WCHA-orig SR 43 2 8 10 0.233
2009-10 North Dakota D1 NCHC JR 43 2 20 22 0.512
2008-09 North Dakota D1 NCHC SO 32 1 4 5 0.156
2007-08 North Dakota D1 NCHC FR 31 2 5 7 0.226
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.47
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.23
2007-08 · North Dakota
-51.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1146
Defenseman overall
#234
Defenseman born in 1988
#308
in USHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Hamline (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average D
NCAAe PPG
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Denver (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Cornell
0.41 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Fitchburg State · 2016-17
1.429 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Elmira · 2014-15
0.800 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Southern New Hampshire · 2016-17
0.593 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.