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

Tyler Bullard Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-03-14 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
2014-15 New York Bobcats EHL 16 3 9 12 0.750 0.1610 0.1589 0.3673 0.3626
2015-16 Northern Cyclones EHL 41 13 22 35 0.854 0.1832 0.1728 0.4181 0.3944
■ 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
2018-19 Canton D3 — JR 24 3 10 13 0.542
2017-18 Canton D3 — SO 23 6 11 17 0.739
2016-17 Canton D3 — FR 23 9 13 22 0.957
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.96
2016-17 · Canton
+567.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#23786
Forward overall
#947
Forward born in 1995
#302
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ricky DeRosa
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
Bradley Duwe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bob Kinne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Travis Quigley
Southern New Hampshire · 2017-18
0.333 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Andy Yarber
Wentworth · 2009-10
0.600 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Danny O'Donnell
Aurora · 2016-17
0.280 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.