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

Evan Antisdale Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-01-21 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
2013-14 Washington Jr. Nationals EHL 36 3 6 9 0.250 0.0578 0.0565 0.1223 0.1195
2014-15 Vermont Lumberjacks EHL 43 5 21 26 0.605 0.1397 0.1299 0.2959 0.2752
■ 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 Western New England D3 CNE — 8 1 1 2 0.250
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.09
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.25
2015-16 · Western New England
+190.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#35085
Forward overall
#1377
Forward born in 1994
#1255
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mark Knowlton
Trinity · 2014-15
0.444 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Sean Muller
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2011-12
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Jared Coccimiglio
Neumann · 2024-25
0.750 Strong
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.