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

Kyle Fink Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-10-21 Country: USA
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 Cleveland Jr. Lumberjacks NA3HL 48 30 27 57 1.188 0.1490 0.1471 0.3749 0.3700
2012-13 Cobourg Cougars OJHL 9 1 0 1 0.111 0.0272 0.0255 0.0765 0.0717
■ 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
2014-15 Concordia D3 MIAC — 14 1 0 1 0.071
2014-15 Concordia (WI) D3 NCHA SO 14 1 0 1 0.071
2013-14 Concordia D3 MIAC — 14 4 6 10 0.714
2013-14 Concordia (WI) D3 NCHA FR 14 4 6 10 0.714
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.71
2013-14 · Concordia
+1024.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#18774
Forward overall
#713
Forward born in 1992

D1 Comparables

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
William Messa
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Northeastern
0.12 No data
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Hansen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.25 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jon Wilson
Lawrence · 2010-11
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Ike Frankel
Nichols · 2021-22
0.077 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Chad Varney
Hamilton · 2017-18
0.100 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.