← New Search ↗ Social Card

Tommy Dougherty Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-08-18 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 Jr. Flyers EHL 41 10 10 20 0.488 0.1127 0.1144 0.2387 0.2422
2016-17 Philadelphia Jr. Flyers EHL 46 16 27 43 0.935 0.2159 0.2093 0.4574 0.4435
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 Neumann D1 MAC SR 9 0 6 6 0.667
2020-21 Neumann D3 MAC SR 9 0 6 6 0.667
2019-20 Neumann D1 MAC JR 26 8 14 22 0.846
2019-20 Neumann D3 MAC JR 26 8 14 22 0.846
2018-19 Neumann D1 MAC SO 25 5 7 12 0.480
2018-19 Neumann D3 MAC SO 25 5 7 12 0.480
2017-18 Neumann D3 MAC FR 20 1 2 3 0.150
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.15
2017-18 · Neumann
2.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#20012
Forward overall
#790
Forward born in 1996
#419
in EHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Denver (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Manhattanville · 2024-25
0.263 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Bowdoin · 2021-22
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Concordia · 2023-24
0.000 No data
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.