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

Payton Baldillez Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-10-24 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
2013-14 New Hampshire Jr. Monarchs EHL 44 22 41 63 1.432 0.3073 0.2965 0.7012 0.6765
■ 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
2017-18 Norwich D3 LittleEast SR 20 2 7 9 0.450
2016-17 Norwich D3 LittleEast JR 30 4 12 16 0.533
2015-16 Norwich D3 LittleEast SO 21 2 5 7 0.333
2014-15 Norwich D3 LittleEast FR 12 3 2 5 0.417
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.25
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.42
2014-15 · Norwich
+64.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#9948
Forward overall
#369
Forward born in 1993
#20
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Ryan Doucet
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Air Force (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Emil Romig
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Denver (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ian Miller
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sean Gaffney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.14 PPG
→ UConn (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Cody Pisarczyk
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2024-25
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Cole Dubicki
Tufts · 2021-22
0.583 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ludvig Steenberg
Plymouth State · 2014-15
0.518 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.