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

Kyle Eastman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-01-31 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 Tri-City Storm USHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2012-13 Tri-City Storm USHL 54 4 6 10 0.185 0.1138 0.1178 0.5456 0.5647
2013-14 Tri-City Storm USHL 47 5 7 12 0.255 0.1569 0.1550 0.7522 0.7433
2014-15 Tri-City Storm USHL 35 2 6 8 0.229 0.1405 0.1319 0.6735 0.6324
■ 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 Robert Morris D1 — FR 11 0 1 1 0.091
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.09
2015-16 · Robert Morris
-24.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#38639
Forward overall
#1610
Forward born in 1995
#3456
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG
Stanislav Dzakhov
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Average
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ben Ostlie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Steve Gervais
Neumann · 2008-09
0.625 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Parks
Finlandia · 2003-04
1.208 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Carlos Fornaris
New England College · 2014-15
1.115 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.