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

Cullen Willox Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-06-05 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
2013-14 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 55 14 20 34 0.618 0.2295 0.2388 0.6546 0.6812
2014-15 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 51 22 27 49 0.961 0.3567 0.3525 1.0173 1.0052
■ 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
2018-19 St. Thomas D3 — SR 24 9 8 17 0.708
2017-18 St. Thomas D3 — JR 26 12 9 21 0.808
2016-17 St. Thomas D3 — SO 27 7 4 11 0.407
2015-16 St. Thomas D3 — FR 24 5 8 13 0.542
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.26
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.54
2015-16 · St. Thomas
+106.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#10135
Forward overall
#353
Forward born in 1995
#435
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Jay Dickman
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Developing
NCAAe PPG
John Simonson
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.97 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Garret Clemment
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average
NCAAe PPG
Brett Skibba
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ UConn (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kevin Irwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.56 PPG
→ Vermont (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jack Hatton
Saint Mary's · 2016-17
0.600 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Owen Bourdow
UMass Boston · 2018-19
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jacob Kaminski
UMass Boston · 2021-22
0.400 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.