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

Todd Bannerman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-09-22 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 Oakville Blades OJHL 39 10 9 19 0.487 0.1194 0.1173 0.3350 0.3292
2012-13 Oakville Blades OJHL 10 0 2 2 0.200 0.0490 0.0457 0.1375 0.1283
■ 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
2015-16 Southern Maine D3 HockeyEast JR 23 6 3 9 0.391
2014-15 Southern Maine D3 HockeyEast SO 26 4 5 9 0.346
2013-14 Southern Maine D3 HockeyEast FR 26 7 7 14 0.538
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.54
2013-14 · Southern Maine
+746.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#47839
Forward overall
#1817
Forward born in 1992
#3496
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
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
Ben Ostlie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jack Karlsson
Stevenson · 2021-22
0.375 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Thomas Dockery
Norwich · 2015-16
0.222 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Colin Smith
Lawrence · 2008-09
0.261 Developing
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.