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

Alex Trapp Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1995-10-03 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
2014-15 Minnesota Wilderness NAHL 58 1 7 8 0.138 0.0490 0.0492 0.1455 0.1462
2015-16 Minnesota Wilderness NAHL 59 0 11 11 0.186 0.0662 0.0636 0.1966 0.1888
■ 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 St. Thomas D3 CCHA SR 28 3 3 6 0.214
2018-19 St. Thomas D3 CCHA JR 25 2 8 10 0.400
2017-18 St. Thomas D3 CCHA SO 9 0 0 0 0.000
2016-17 St. Thomas D3 CCHA FR 17 2 5 7 0.412
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.41
2016-17 · St. Thomas
+654.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#22991
Defenseman overall
#2446
Defenseman born in 1995
#6262
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 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
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Kyle McKenzie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Phil Erickson
Wilkes · 2017-18
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Alex Corvi
Nazareth · 2014-15
0.182 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Gershon
SUNY Brockport · 2004-05
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.