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

Andrew Trecroce Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-12-15 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
2009-10 Blind River Beavers NOJHL 39 5 11 16 0.410 0.0584 0.0592 0.1708 0.1731
2010-11 Blind River Beavers NOJHL 44 9 18 27 0.614 0.0874 0.0839 0.2555 0.2454
■ 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
2013-14 Finlandia D3 — JR 14 0 2 2 0.143
2012-13 Finlandia D3 — SO 12 0 1 1 0.083
2011-12 Finlandia D3 — FR 9 0 2 2 0.222
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.22
2011-12 · Finlandia
+250.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#41471
Forward overall
#1493
Forward born in 1990
#775
in NOJHL

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Stanislav Dzakhov
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ben Ostlie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Peter Karavos
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2015-16
0.586 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Joey Sardina
Lake Forest · 2016-17
0.593 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Nic Weight
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2007-08
0.409 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.