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

Ali Thomas Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-03-13 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 Chicago Steel USHL 53 12 6 18 0.340 0.2003 0.1891 1.0200 0.9627
2012-13 — USHL 50 7 10 17 0.340 0.2006 0.1787 1.0212 0.9095
■ 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 Notre Dame D1 BigTen SO 30 0 3 3 0.100
2013-14 Notre Dame D1 BigTen FR 11 1 1 2 0.182
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.18
2013-14 · Notre Dame
+16.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#27027
Forward overall
#1003
Forward born in 1992
#2589
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Tyler Dill
Utica · 2017-18
0.518 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Paul
Framingham State · 2016-17
0.684 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Vincent Paquette
Adrian · 2015-16
1.000 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.