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

Kyle Criscuolo Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-05-05 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
2011-12 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 59 21 23 44 0.746 0.4584 0.4360 2.1973 2.0899
■ 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
2015-16 Harvard D1 ECAC SR 34 19 13 32 0.941
2014-15 Harvard D1 ECAC JR 37 17 31 48 1.297
2013-14 Harvard D1 ECAC SO 31 11 9 20 0.645
2012-13 Harvard D1 ECAC FR 22 6 7 13 0.591
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.37
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.59
2012-13 · Harvard
+58.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6589
Forward overall
#312
Forward born in 1992
#482
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Tyler Heinonen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Robbie Payne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.12 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Phil Marinaccio
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.45 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jared Linnell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.72 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Biggs
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ Miami (0.46 D1 FR PPG)
0.49 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Justin Fox
Salem State · 2006-07
1.429 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Ellis
SUNY Oswego · 2003-04
1.704 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brett Gravelle
St. Thomas · 2015-16
0.923 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.