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

Nick Schilkey Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-05-12 Country: USA
Signed Professionally
IF Björklöven · Allsvenskan

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 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 59 16 20 36 0.610 0.3600 0.3787 1.8327 1.9280
2012-13 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 59 32 39 71 1.203 0.7099 0.7091 3.6143 3.6100
2021-22 Iserlohn Roosters DEL 49 8 19 27 0.551 1.3775 1.4242 4.6715 4.8300
2022-23 IF Björklöven Allsvenskan 52 25 43 68 1.308 3.2693 2.7305 12.2687 10.2466
2023-24 IF Björklöven Allsvenskan 34 11 17 28 0.824 2.0587 1.6639 7.7260 6.2445
■ 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
2016-17 Ohio State D1 BigTen SR 35 27 14 41 1.171
2015-16 Ohio State D1 BigTen JR 36 19 22 41 1.139
2014-15 Ohio State D1 BigTen SO 33 10 12 22 0.667
2013-14 Ohio State D1 BigTen FR 37 13 13 26 0.703
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.54
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.70
2013-14 · Ohio State
+30.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

🏒 NHL / Pro Track — production profile is consistent with players who bypassed or minimized college hockey
0%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
100%
NHL / Pro

NCAAe Rankings

#70
Forward overall
#4
Forward born in 1994

D2/3 Comparables

Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Osmundson
Utica · 2018-19
1.448 Elite
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.