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

Yann Poirier Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1980-04-15 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
2000-01 Dauphin Kings MJHL 33 13 25 38 1.151 0.3258 0.2995 0.7256 0.6669
■ 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
2004-05 Wisconsin-Superior D3 — SR 27 6 9 15 0.556
2003-04 Wisconsin-Superior D3 — JR 27 9 23 32 1.185
2002-03 Wisconsin-Superior D3 — SO 26 8 8 16 0.615
2001-02 Wisconsin-Superior D3 — FR 33 20 14 34 1.030
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.26
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.03
2001-02 · Wisconsin-Superior
+301.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2517
Forward overall
#70
Forward born in 1980

D1 Comparables

Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bradley Duwe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Clint Carlisle
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.78 PPG
→ Army (0.52 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Average
NCAAe PPG
Justin Parizek
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Noah Trathen
UMass Dartmouth · 2023-24
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Cann
Elmira · 2004-05
0.786 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Manny Gialedakis
SUNY Oswego · 2012-13
0.750 Strong
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.