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

Bo Pieper Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-12-17 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 52 7 9 16 0.308 0.1959 0.2120 0.9221 0.9977
2012-13 Indiana Ice USHL 63 2 10 12 0.191 0.1213 0.1248 0.5709 0.5873
2013-14 Coquitlam Express BCHL 58 27 32 59 1.017 0.3959 0.3985 1.4834 1.4933
■ 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
2017-18 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC SR 38 11 7 18 0.474
2016-17 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC JR 40 13 12 25 0.625
2015-16 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC SO 42 5 4 9 0.214
2014-15 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC FR 38 3 10 13 0.342
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.25
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.34
2014-15 · Quinnipiac
+38.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13367
Forward overall
#553
Forward born in 1994

D1 Comparables

Joe Cox
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Villiam Haag
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Average
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Schempp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.58 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Andrew Poturalski
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.72 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Peter Krieger
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.92 PPG
→ Alaska (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mike Bickley
Wisconsin-Superior · 2000-01
1.231 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Nolan Redler
UMass Boston · 2014-15
1.125 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Johnny Panvica
St. Thomas · 2014-15
0.955 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.