← New Search ↗ Social Card

Evan Campbell Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-03-01 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
2010-11 Cowichan Valley Capitals BCHL 1 0 0 0 0.000
2011-12 BCHL 48 12 9 21 0.438 0.1686 0.1703 0.6367 0.6433
2012-13 Langley Rivermen BCHL 51 20 46 66 1.294 0.4986 0.4802 1.8833 1.8137
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
2016-17 UMass Lowell D1 HockeyEast 33 1 4 5 0.151
2015-16 UMass Lowell D1 HockeyEast 28 5 7 12 0.429
2014-15 UMass Lowell D1 HockeyEast 34 12 15 27 0.794
2013-14 UMass Lowell D1 HockeyEast 33 9 2 11 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.30
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2013-14 · UMass Lowell
+9.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#12081
Forward overall
#454
Forward born in 1993
#399
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.48 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Union (0.89 D1 FR PPG)
0.53 Elite
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.90 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.72 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lawrence · 2023-24
0.842 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
UMass Boston · 2016-17
2.500 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Morrisville · 2007-08
1.160 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.