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

Shawn Hulshof Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-06-04 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
2011-12 Trenton Golden Hawks OJHL 47 18 26 44 0.936 0.2616 0.2662 0.6461 0.6575
2012-13 Trenton Golden Hawks OJHL 52 25 20 45 0.865 0.2418 0.2340 0.5972 0.5780
■ 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
2016-17 SUNY Oswego D3 — SR 28 13 28 41 1.464
2015-16 SUNY Oswego D3 — JR 27 11 16 27 1.000
2014-15 SUNY Oswego D3 — SO 28 20 22 42 1.500
2013-14 SUNY Oswego D3 — FR 23 10 10 20 0.870
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.87
2013-14 · SUNY Oswego
+311.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#14572
Forward overall
#538
Forward born in 1993
#878
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG
Robin Höglund
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mike Serba
Norwich · 2000-01
0.696 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Mike Stevens
Southern Maine · 2004-05
0.963 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Gray
Connecticut College · 2006-07
0.609 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.