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

Tyler Dorantes Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1995-04-07 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
2012-13 Des Moines Buccaneers USHL 38 1 6 7 0.184 0.1173 0.1225 0.5520 0.5763
2013-14 — USHL 33 1 1 2 0.061 0.0386 0.0385 0.1816 0.1811
■ 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 Ferris State D1 WCHA SR 30 1 5 6 0.200
2016-17 Ferris State D1 WCHA JR 37 0 2 2 0.054
2015-16 Ferris State D1 WCHA SO 37 0 8 8 0.216
2014-15 Ferris State D1 WCHA FR 9 1 0 1 0.111
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.07
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.11
2014-15 · Ferris State
+63.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#16948
Defenseman overall
#1993
Defenseman born in 1995
#4167
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Dylan Maller
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Phil Boje
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.10 PPG
→ Air Force (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Chris Buchanan
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ Bentley (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Justin Wade
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.11 No data
NCAAe PPG
Dane Cooper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Brown (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Emmet Powell
Wesleyan · 2018-19
0.346 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Grady Friedman
UMass Boston · 2018-19
0.320 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Henry Molson
Colby · 2018-19
0.333 Developing
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.