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

Thomas Bordeleau Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2002-01-03 Country: USA
2020 · Round 2, Pick #38  ·  San Jose Sharks San Jose Sharks
Signed Professionally

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
2018-19 — NTDP-U18 56 16 23 39 0.696 0.5176 0.5217 2.5985 2.6189
2019-20 — NTDP-U18 47 16 30 46 0.979 0.7275 0.7275 3.6519 3.6519
■ 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
2021-22 Michigan D1 BigTen SO 37 12 25 37 1.000
2020-21 Michigan D1 BigTen FR 24 8 22 30 1.250
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.49
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.25
2020-21 · Michigan
+157.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

85%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
15%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Patrick Newell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.59 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Austin Poganski
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average
NCAAe PPG
Nick Schmaltz
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.81 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Hitchcock
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Yale (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.45 Average
NCAAe PPG
Connor Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Ryan Reifler
Elmira · 2017-18
1.067 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Lucas Signoretti
Buffalo State · 2023-24
1.120 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Sascha Figi
Fitchburg State · 2016-17
1.429 Elite
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.