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

Cole McCaskill Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1996-04-13 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
2013-14 Salmon Arm Silverbacks BCHL 47 4 15 19 0.404 0.1558 0.1671 0.5884 0.6313
2014-15 — BCHL 40 6 15 21 0.525 0.2023 0.2076 0.7640 0.7840
■ 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 Colorado College D1 NCHC — 35 2 5 7 0.200
2017-18 Colorado College D1 NCHC — 27 2 3 5 0.185
2016-17 Colorado College D1 NCHC — 30 2 6 8 0.267
2015-16 Colorado College D1 NCHC — 30 3 5 8 0.267
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.27
2015-16 · Colorado College
+47.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#8412
Defenseman overall
#1359
Defenseman born in 1996
#1800
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

Jeff Taylor
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Union (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Clay Anderson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Harvard (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Tim Davison
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Scott Moldenhauer
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Benning
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kyle Gierman
Lawrence · 2017-18
0.889 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Kevin Pitts
Curry · 2018-19
0.586 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Raphael Robitaille
Norwich · 2003-04
1.240 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.