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

Tom Longland Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1988-08-04 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
2007-08 Pickering Panthers OJHL 31 3 10 13 0.419 0.1028 0.0998 0.2888 0.2803
■ 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
2011-12 SUNY Morrisville D3 SUNYAC SR 25 3 8 11 0.440
2010-11 SUNY Morrisville D3 SUNYAC JR 25 5 10 15 0.600
2009-10 SUNY Morrisville D3 SUNYAC SO 26 6 8 14 0.538
2008-09 SUNY Morrisville D3 SUNYAC FR 24 1 7 8 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.09
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2008-09 · SUNY Morrisville
+253.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13469
Defenseman overall
#1376
Defenseman born in 1988
#2730
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Neal Goff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Christian Neumann
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ UConn (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
James Roll
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Joe Schuldt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Michigan Tech
0.05 No data
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

Wilson Northey
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2016-17
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Conner Schneider
Augsburg · 2022-23
0.640 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kenneth Thurston
Southern New Hampshire · 2023-24
0.400 Average
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.