← New Search ↗ Social Card

Philip Törnqvist Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2001-08-24 Country: Sweden
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 Karlskrona HK U20 SuperElit 41 2 12 14 0.342 0.1348 0.1430 0.4705 0.4993
2019-20 Rögle BK U20 SuperElit 24 2 13 15 0.625 0.2466 0.2466 0.8611 0.8611
2020-21 Rögle BK U20 SuperElit 16 3 6 9 0.562 0.2220 0.2220 0.7750 0.7750
2021-22 — NAHL 52 20 13 33 0.635 0.2332 0.2235 0.6707 0.6429
■ 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 Vermont D1 HockeyEast — 32 2 8 10 0.312
2024-25 Vermont D1 HockeyEast — 33 2 6 8 0.242
2023-24 Vermont D1 HockeyEast — 29 2 4 6 0.207
2022-23 Vermont D1 HockeyEast — 32 1 3 4 0.125
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.12
2022-23 · Vermont
-30.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

55%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
32%
Age-Out / Club
8%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#5583
Defenseman overall
#1256
Defenseman born in 2001

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Bowdoin · 2014-15
0.640 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2014-15
0.692 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Morrisville · 2008-09
0.577 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.