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

Trevor Moore Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-03-31 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 — USHL 49 12 20 32 0.653 0.4159 0.4559 1.9571 2.1454
2012-13 — USHL 62 20 43 63 1.016 0.6471 0.6749 3.0449 3.1758
■ 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 Denver D1 NCHC JR 40 11 33 44 1.100
2014-15 Denver D1 NCHC SO 39 22 22 44 1.128
2013-14 Denver D1 NCHC FR 42 14 18 32 0.762
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.55
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.76
2013-14 · Denver
+39.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1896
Forward overall
#69
Forward born in 1995
#238
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Anthony Louis
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Miami (0.69 D1 FR PPG)
0.69 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Sean Malone
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.87 PPG
→ Harvard (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.58 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Vinni Lettieri
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.92 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.61 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Gabe Guertler
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.85 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.57 Developing
NCAAe PPG
John Hayden
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.83 PPG
→ Yale (0.48 D1 FR PPG)
0.55 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Filimon Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Osmundson
Utica · 2016-17
1.448 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 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.