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

Kyle Cook Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-05-08 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
2010-11 — NAHL 55 11 10 21 0.382 0.1403 0.1454 0.4030 0.4177
2011-12 Springfield Jr. Blues NAHL 59 31 39 70 1.186 0.4359 0.4303 1.2522 1.2362
■ 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 Mercyhurst D1 AHA SR 29 6 11 17 0.586
2014-15 Mercyhurst D1 AHA JR 20 2 8 10 0.500
2013-14 Mercyhurst D1 AHA SO 40 11 7 18 0.450
2012-13 Mercyhurst D1 AHA FR 25 2 1 3 0.120
2008-09 Suffolk D3 CNE SR 24 14 17 31 1.292
2007-08 Suffolk D3 CNE JR 27 17 19 36 1.333

NCAAe Rankings

#12522
Forward overall
#503
Forward born in 1992
#447
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Tyler Heinonen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Robbie Payne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.12 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Phil Marinaccio
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jared Linnell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.72 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Biggs
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ Miami (0.46 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Daniel Eruzione
Salve Regina · 2015-16
1.207 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Dylan Giorgio
Bethel · 2017-18
0.520 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Rihards Marenis
Aurora · 2012-13
1.000 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.