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

Andrew Copp Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-07-08 Country: USA
2013 · Round 4, Pick #104  ·  Winnipeg Jets Winnipeg Jets
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
2010-11 — NTDP-U18 30 2 4 6 0.200 0.1487 0.1544 0.7463 0.7747
2011-12 — NTDP-U18 32 6 11 17 0.531 0.3948 0.3895 1.9821 1.9556
■ 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
2014-15 Michigan D1 BigTen JR 36 14 17 31 0.861
2013-14 Michigan D1 BigTen SO 33 15 14 29 0.879
2012-13 Michigan D1 CCHA-orig FR 38 11 10 21 0.553
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.25
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.55
2012-13 · Michigan
+118.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#14524
Forward overall
#595
Forward born in 1994

D1 Comparables

Hudson Fasching
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.53 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.75 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Avery Peterson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Weis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Frederik Tiffels
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.66 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Galt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brycon Johnson
Bryn Athyn · 2014-15
0.778 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Justin Fox
Salem State · 2005-06
1.429 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Zach Tarantino
UMass Dartmouth · 2017-18
0.667 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.