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

Thomas Weekes Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2006-07-24 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
2024-25 — NAHL 32 4 3 7 0.219 0.0777 0.0820 0.2297 0.2423
■ 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
2025-26 Delaware ACHA_D1 — — 31 8 13 21 0.677
2024-25 Delaware ACHA_D1 — — 31 8 13 21 0.677
2023-24 Delaware ACHA_D1 — — 31 8 13 21 0.677
2022-23 Delaware ACHA_D1 — — 31 8 13 21 0.677
2021-22 Delaware ACHA_D1 — — 31 8 13 21 0.677
2020-21 Delaware ACHA_D1 — — 31 8 13 21 0.677

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

15%
NCAA D1
15%
NCAA D2/D3
20%
Age-Out / Club
48%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#19167
Defenseman overall
#3212
Defenseman born in 2006
#5649
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Jake Bischoff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Jimmy Mazza
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Canisius (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Zach Yoder
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.10 PPG
→ Air Force (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Doyle Somerby
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Boston University (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Cutler Martin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Michigan (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kyle Greco
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2006-07
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Willett
Endicott · 2018-19
0.643 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Corey Chakeen
UMass Boston · 2007-08
0.538 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.