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

Billy Kent Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-09-19 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
2011-12 New Mexico Mustangs NAHL 28 10 2 12 0.429 0.1575 0.1663 0.4524 0.4775
■ 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
2017-18 Lake Forest D3 NCHA SR 27 6 15 21 0.778
2016-17 Lake Forest D3 NCHA JR 23 7 6 13 0.565
2015-16 Lake Forest D3 NCHA SO 25 9 8 17 0.680
2014-15 Lake Forest D3 NCHA FR 24 7 1 8 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2014-15 · Lake Forest
+134.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#32850
Forward overall
#1139
Forward born in 1993
#3151
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Ryan Fitzgerald
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.12 PPG
→ Boston College (0.72 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Thomas Ebbing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ian Mansfield
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Army (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cédric Lacroix
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.13 PPG
→ Maine (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jake Horton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Harvard (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Josh Keizer
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2008-09
1.069 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Shane Shell
Hobart · 2018-19
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Austin Mourar
Hobart · 2017-18
0.000 No data
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.