← New Search ↗ Social Card

Tyler Pietrowski Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-03-15 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 Philadelphia Little Flyers EHL 17 4 5 9 0.529 0.1223 0.1269 0.2590 0.2687
2015-16 Philadelphia Little Flyers EHL 39 27 26 53 1.359 0.3139 0.3119 0.6650 0.6607
2016-17 Odessa Jackalopes NAHL 46 12 13 25 0.543 0.1997 0.1854 0.5737 0.5326
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
2020-21 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D1 BigTen FR 8 1 1 2 0.250
2020-21 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 WIAC 8 1 1 2 0.250
2019-20 Utica D1 UCHC JR 11 2 4 6 0.545
2019-20 Utica D3 UCHC GR 11 2 4 6 0.545
2018-19 Utica D1 UCHC SO 22 3 8 11 0.500
2018-19 Utica D3 UCHC SR 22 3 8 11 0.500
2017-18 Utica D3 UCHC JR 13 4 8 12 0.923
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.92
2017-18 · Utica
+357.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#20660
Forward overall
#821
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Gustavus Adolphus · 2017-18
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Saint Mary's (MN) · 2013-14
0.630 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Fredonia · 2016-17
0.545 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.