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

Blake Hillman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1996-01-26 Country: USA
2016 · Round 6, Pick #173  ·  Chicago Blackhawks Chicago Blackhawks
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
2013-14 Dubuque Fighting Saints USHL 57 3 10 13 0.228 0.1346 0.1396 0.6851 0.7108
2014-15 — USHL 55 3 15 18 0.327 0.1931 0.1908 0.9830 0.9715
■ 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 Denver D1 NCHC JR 41 3 9 12 0.293
2016-17 Denver D1 NCHC SO 43 1 7 8 0.186
2015-16 Denver D1 NCHC FR 39 3 8 11 0.282
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.28
2015-16 · Denver
+75.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#8486
Defenseman overall
#1370
Defenseman born in 1996
#2982
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Vince Pedrie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Penn State (0.69 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Eric Sweetman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Johnny Wingels
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Miami
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Justin Woods
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Gluchowski
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.40 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.55 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Anthony Ceolin
Fitchburg State · 2017-18
0.692 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Bryan Tang
Skidmore · 2023-24
0.571 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Peter Magagna
SUNY Oswego · 2002-03
0.926 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.