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

Tyler Nelson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1989-09-04 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
2008-09 — NAHL 3 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2009-10 — OJHL 49 5 12 17 0.347 0.0850 0.0783 0.2388 0.2199
■ 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
2015-16 Saint John's D3 MIAC — 0 5 76 81 0.000
2012-13 Buffalo State D3 SUNYAC — 6 0 2 2 0.333
2011-12 Buffalo State D3 SUNYAC — 22 3 6 9 0.409
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.07
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.41
2011-12 · Buffalo State
+453.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#16487
Defenseman overall
#1529
Defenseman born in 1989

D1 Comparables

William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nathan Pelligra
Manhattanville · 2012-13
0.286 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Andrews
St. Norbert · 2014-15
0.370 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Drew Doyon
Aurora · 2015-16
0.632 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.