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

Vimal Sukumaran Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-04-09 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
2015-16 Chilliwack Chiefs BCHL 52 32 34 66 1.269 0.4890 0.4753 1.8459 1.7944
■ 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
2019-20 Providence D1 HockeyEast SR 33 4 2 6 0.182
2018-19 Providence D1 HockeyEast JR 32 6 5 11 0.344
2017-18 Providence D1 HockeyEast SO 40 10 8 18 0.450
2016-17 Providence D1 HockeyEast FR 24 8 4 12 0.500
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.41
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.50
2016-17 · Providence
+22.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6618
Forward overall
#312
Forward born in 1996
#78
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

Dominik Shine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.90 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Biggs
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ Miami (0.46 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average
NCAAe PPG
Phil Marinaccio
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jared Linnell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.72 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Heinonen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Bailey Conger
UMass Boston · 2016-17
2.500 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Luke Moodie
SUNY Oswego · 2008-09
0.926 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Paul Rodrigues
SUNY Oswego · 2007-08
0.893 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.