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

Pat Twombly Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1997-11-19 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
2016-17 Express Hockey Club EHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2017-18 Express Hockey Club EHL 42 4 6 10 0.238 0.0511 0.0499 0.1166 0.1139
■ 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
2021-22 UMass Dartmouth D3 — SR 23 0 1 1 0.043
2020-21 UMass Dartmouth D3 HockeyEast JR 3 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 UMass Dartmouth D3 HockeyEast SO 25 0 5 5 0.200
2018-19 UMass Dartmouth D3 HockeyEast FR 10 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

35%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
2%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#21897
Defenseman overall
#2642
Defenseman born in 1997
#2365
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Garret Peterson
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ Army (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Kyle McKenzie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.16 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mikhail Bushinski
Utica · 2012-13
0.214 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Jacob Juron
SUNY Potsdam · 2016-17
0.364 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon McReynolds
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2016-17
0.091 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.