← New Search ↗ Social Card

Tyler Sifferlen Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-08-23 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
2014-15 Chicago Steel USHL 56 7 3 10 0.179 0.1137 0.1099 0.5352 0.5175
2015-16 Islanders Hockey Club USPHL-Premier-Classic 35 17 12 29 0.829 0.2488 0.2413 0.6825 0.6619
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
2019-20 UMass Boston D3 HockeyEast SR 6 1 1 2 0.333
2018-19 UMass Boston D3 HockeyEast JR 20 4 3 7 0.350
2017-18 UMass Boston D3 HockeyEast SO 27 7 11 18 0.667
2016-17 UMass Boston D3 HockeyEast FR 18 2 6 8 0.444
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.44
2016-17 · UMass Boston
+175.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#21084
Forward overall
#831
Forward born in 1995

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Air Force (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Sacred Heart (0.40 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Utica · 2004-05
0.889 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Castleton · 2005-06
1.111 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Oswego · 2015-16
0.600 Average
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.