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

Travis Erstad Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-11-09 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
2006-07 Lincoln Stars USHL 8 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2007-08 Lincoln Stars USHL 52 9 10 19 0.365 0.2155 0.2118 1.0765 1.0580
■ 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 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 — SR 16 0 5 5 0.312
2009-10 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 — SO 23 5 10 15 0.652
2008-09 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 — FR 26 10 8 18 0.692
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.69
2008-09 · Wisconsin-Stevens Point
+281.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#24520
Forward overall
#850
Forward born in 1988
#2399
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Dylan Gareau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kenny Gillespie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ RPI (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Landon Smith
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.79 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Hynes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Union (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Austin Vieth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Walker Harris
Wesleyan · 2015-16
0.808 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Joel Covelli
Colby · 2003-04
1.042 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Shane Wheeler
St. Norbert · 2005-06
0.903 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.