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

Peter Hatton Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-07-10 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
2015-16 Philadelphia Little Flyers EHL 38 4 25 29 0.763 0.1638 0.1654 0.3737 0.3773
2016-17 Philadelphia Little Flyers EHL 48 16 44 60 1.250 0.2682 0.2586 0.6121 0.5902
■ 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
2020-21 Tufts D3 NESCAC SR 0 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 Tufts D3 NESCAC JR 20 2 1 3 0.150
2018-19 Tufts D3 NESCAC SO 12 0 1 1 0.083
2017-18 Tufts D3 NESCAC FR 16 2 3 5 0.312
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.31
2017-18 · Tufts
+65.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#17201
Forward overall
#707
Forward born in 1996
#110
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Cody Marooney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jayson Angus
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Clint Carlisle
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.78 PPG
→ Army (0.52 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Adam Place
SUNY Potsdam · 2009-10
0.412 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Devin Brink
SUNY Geneseo · 2015-16
0.654 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ethan Nitkin
UMass Boston · 2017-18
0.652 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.