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

Tyler Resch Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1981-04-04 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
2000-01 — AJHL 61 21 46 67 1.098 0.3669 0.3536 1.0196 0.9827
2001-02 St. Albert Saints AJHL 61 36 51 87 1.426 0.4764 0.4360 1.3239 1.2116
■ 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
2005-06 Manhattanville D3 — SR 26 8 12 20 0.769
2004-05 Manhattanville D3 — JR 18 3 10 13 0.722
2003-04 Manhattanville D3 — SO 19 4 13 17 0.895
2002-03 Manhattanville D3 — FR 26 13 17 30 1.154
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.34
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.15
2002-03 · Manhattanville
+234.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#4341
Forward overall
#209
Forward born in 1981
#73
in AJHL

D1 Comparables

Carlos Amestoy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.40 No data
NCAAe PPG
Todd Skirving
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ RIT (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Strong
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Average
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Shane Sooth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.54 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Daniel Eruzione
Salve Regina · 2016-17
1.207 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brett Mueller
Fredonia · 2008-09
0.842 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Chris Peters
UMass Boston · 2017-18
0.720 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.