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

Eduards Tralmaks Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-02-17 Country: Latvia
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
2015-16 — EHL 40 28 27 55 1.375 0.3176 0.3303 0.6728 0.6997
2016-17 — USHL 46 11 16 27 0.587 0.3463 0.3269 1.7630 1.6642
■ 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
2020-21 Maine D1 HockeyEast SR 12 6 4 10 0.833
2019-20 Maine D1 HockeyEast JR 34 14 16 30 0.882
2018-19 Maine D1 HockeyEast SO 36 8 9 17 0.472
2017-18 Maine D1 HockeyEast FR 37 11 14 25 0.676
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.28
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.68
2017-18 · Maine
+140.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#8793
Forward overall
#410
Forward born in 1997

D1 Comparables

Ryan Siiro
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Princeton (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Average
NCAAe PPG
Cameron Brown
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Maine (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Average
NCAAe PPG
Charlie O'Connor
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ben Foster
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.60 PPG
→ Princeton (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eric Freschi
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.51 PPG
→ Cornell (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Connor Armour
Adrian · 2013-14
1.357 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brad Olson
Manhattanville · 2000-01
1.115 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Rusty Masters
Elmira · 2005-06
0.962 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.