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

Chris Sinclair Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-08-23 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
2006-07 — MJHL 56 4 24 28 0.500 0.1414 0.1477 0.3150 0.3291
2007-08 Beausejour Blades MJHL 22 6 12 18 0.818 0.2315 0.2294 0.5155 0.5108
■ 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
2012-13 St. Scholastica D3 — SR 26 1 9 10 0.385
2011-12 St. Scholastica D3 — JR 23 2 9 11 0.478
2010-11 St. Scholastica D3 — SO 10 0 0 0 0.000
2009-10 St. Scholastica D3 — FR 11 1 4 5 0.455
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.45
2009-10 · St. Scholastica
+169.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#20920
Forward overall
#881
Forward born in 1988
#562
in MJHL

D1 Comparables

Jake Wood
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ RPI (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Sieckhaus
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Bentley (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
C.J. Reuschlein
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ Army (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Zach Szajner
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Max McHugh
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Scott Pulak
St. Norbert · 2006-07
0.548 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Sean Melso
SUNY Geneseo · 2021-22
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Alessio Luciani
Adrian · 2017-18
1.103 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.