← New Search ↗ Social Card

Philip Tresca Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2002-04-10 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
2018-19 Rivers School NE-Prep 30 8 16 24 0.800 0.1585 0.1585 0.3645 0.3645
2019-20 Rivers School NE-Prep 26 2 4 6 0.231 0.0457 0.0457 0.1052 0.1052
2020-21 Muskegon Lumberjacks USHL 44 7 2 9 0.204 0.1206 0.1206 0.6142 0.6142
2021-22 Muskegon Lumberjacks USHL 61 28 26 54 0.885 0.5222 0.4957 2.6586 2.5234
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 Harvard D1 ECAC SR 30 8 11 19 0.633
2024-25 Harvard D1 ECAC JR 31 4 8 12 0.387
2023-24 Harvard D1 ECAC SO 16 0 7 7 0.438
2022-23 Harvard D1 ECAC FR 34 4 4 8 0.235
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.27
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.24
2022-23 · Harvard
-12.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

90%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
5%
Age-Out / Club
2%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#15868
Forward overall
#824
Forward born in 2002

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.90 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Average
NCAAe PPG
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ Miami (0.46 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Union (0.89 D1 FR PPG)
0.53 Elite
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.72 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Fitchburg State · 2016-17
1.429 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Aurora · 2013-14
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Buffalo State · 2023-24
1.120 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.