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

Evan Barratt Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-02-18 Country: USA
2017 · Round 3, Pick #90  ·  Chicago Blackhawks Chicago Blackhawks
Signed Professionally
Nürnberg Ice Tigers · DEL

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
2015-16 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 58 15 25 40 0.690 0.5127 0.5204 2.5735 2.6122
2016-17 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 63 18 38 56 0.889 0.6607 0.6382 3.3168 3.2038
2023-24 Nürnberg Ice Tigers DEL 51 8 19 27 0.529 1.3235 1.5773 4.4884 5.3492
2024-25 Nürnberg Ice Tigers DEL 50 19 43 62 1.240 3.1000 3.5522 10.5130 12.0464
2025-26 Nürnberg Ice Tigers DEL 51 16 49 65 1.274 3.1862 3.8002 10.8055 12.8879
■ 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 Penn State D1 BigTen JR 34 12 22 34 1.000
2018-19 Penn State D1 BigTen SO 32 16 27 43 1.344
2017-18 Penn State D1 BigTen FR 32 11 7 18 0.562
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.55
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.56
2017-18 · Penn State
+2.2% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

🏒 NHL / Pro Track — production profile is consistent with players who bypassed or minimized college hockey
0%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
100%
NHL / Pro

NCAAe Rankings

D2/3 Comparables

Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Osmundson
Utica · 2018-19
1.448 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.