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

Tony Bretzman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1994-11-10 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
2013-14 Langley Rivermen BCHL 57 3 22 25 0.439 0.1690 0.1693 0.6379 0.6389
■ 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
2018-19 Northern Michigan D1 WCHA SR 38 4 7 11 0.289
2017-18 Notre Dame D1 BigTen — 0 0 0 0 0.000
2016-17 Notre Dame D1 BigTen JR 15 0 1 1 0.067
2015-16 Notre Dame D1 BigTen SO 8 1 0 1 0.125
2014-15 Notre Dame D1 BigTen FR 17 1 1 2 0.118
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.12
2014-15 · Notre Dame
-26.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#9695
Defenseman overall
#1354
Defenseman born in 1994
#2005
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

Eric Schurhamer
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Maine (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Cliff Watson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dakota Mermis
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Denver (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Neal Goff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Mike Preston
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.07 PPG
→ Army (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nick Weaver
Franklin Pierce · 2018-19
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Dan Cecka
Wisconsin-Stout · 2008-09
0.556 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Chase Nieuwendyk
SUNY Brockport · 2009-10
0.667 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.