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

T.J. Moore Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-01-10 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 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 3 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2013-14 Chicago Steel USHL 5 0 2 2 0.400 0.2360 0.2325 1.2014 1.1837
■ 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 Holy Cross D1 AHA SR 36 8 22 30 0.833
2016-17 Holy Cross D1 AHA JR 27 13 12 25 0.926
2015-16 Holy Cross D1 AHA SO 33 15 13 28 0.849
2014-15 Holy Cross D1 AHA FR 37 11 12 23 0.622
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.62
2014-15 · Holy Cross
+212.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Blake Winiecki
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jeff Kubiak
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Cornell (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Austin Vieth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Mason Jobst
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.86 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Kenny Gillespie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ RPI (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Andrew Kangas
St. Thomas · 2016-17
0.474 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brent Wold
Utica · 2011-12
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Roman Ammirato
Utica · 2011-12
1.296 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.