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

T.J. Samec Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1995-05-03 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 Winkler Flyers MJHL 24 2 7 9 0.375 0.0722 0.0745 0.2365 0.2440
2014-15 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 50 5 10 15 0.300 0.1102 0.1084 0.3167 0.3115
2015-16 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 60 10 15 25 0.417 0.1531 0.1438 0.4398 0.4131
■ 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
2019-20 RPI D1 ECAC — 10 0 1 1 0.100
2018-19 RPI D1 ECAC — 35 1 4 5 0.143
2017-18 RPI D1 ECAC — 26 1 2 3 0.115
2016-17 RPI D1 ECAC — 14 0 1 1 0.071
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.07
2016-17 · RPI
-41.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#12125
Defenseman overall
#1637
Defenseman born in 1995

D1 Comparables

Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 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
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Carson Rose
St. Scholastica · 2016-17
0.450 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brent Bisdee
SUNY Geneseo · 2011-12
0.385 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brayden Sampson
Aurora · 2017-18
0.518 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.