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

Kevin Pitts Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-10-21 Country: Canada
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
2018-19 Holderness NE-Prep 30 16 24 40 1.333 0.2641 0.2641 0.6075 0.6075
2019-20 Maine Nordiques NAHL 51 14 25 39 0.765 0.2810 0.2810 0.8071 0.8071
■ 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
2022-23 Curry D3 CNE — 29 7 10 17 0.586
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.23
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.59
2022-23 · Curry
+159.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

5%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
85%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#12931
Forward overall
#585
Forward born in 1999

D1 Comparables

Thomas Ebbing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Osterberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.77 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Mitch Hults
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Average
NCAAe PPG
Jake Horton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Harvard (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Aston-Reese
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Doug Lindensmith
Norwich · 2008-09
1.044 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Kowin Belsterling
Chatham · 2022-23
1.208 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brad Michalchuk
Middlebury · 2000-01
0.556 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.