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

Eli Barnett Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-09-16 Country: Canada
2022 NHL Draft Round 7, Pick #195  ·  San Jose Sharks San Jose Sharks
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
2021-22 — BCHL 53 3 10 13 0.245 0.0914 0.0951 0.3574 0.3718
2022-23 — BCHL 52 4 5 9 0.173 0.0645 0.0639 0.2522 0.2500
■ 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
2024-25 Vermont D1 HockeyEast — 8 0 0 0 0.000
2023-24 Vermont D1 HockeyEast — 24 0 5 5 0.208
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.07
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.21
2023-24 · Vermont
+188.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

12%
NCAA D1
12%
NCAA D2/D3
40%
Age-Out / Club
32%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#21148
Defenseman overall
#3528
Defenseman born in 2003
#3302
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

Joe Schuldt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Michigan Tech
0.05 No data
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
Christian Neumann
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ UConn (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Tommy Davis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Princeton (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Luke Golisano
Plymouth State · 2023-24
0.125 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Josh Timpano
SUNY Oswego · 2011-12
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tanner Skaja
Wisconsin-Superior · 2014-15
0.240 Developing
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.