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

Chad Thompson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1984-06-29 Country: Canada
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
2001-02 London Knights OHL 52 3 6 9 0.173 0.1004 0.1064 0.4436 0.4701
2002-03 — OHL 57 10 12 22 0.386 0.2240 0.2265 0.9891 1.0003
2003-04 Barrie Colts OHL 41 5 8 13 0.317 0.1840 0.1762 0.8126 0.7780
2004-05 — OHL 63 5 15 20 0.318 0.1842 0.1668 0.8136 0.7367
■ 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
2011-12 Lake Forest D3 — JR 4 0 0 0 0.000
2010-11 Lake Forest D3 — SO 18 4 3 7 0.389
2009-10 Lake Forest D3 — FR 14 1 9 10 0.714
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.71
2009-10 · Lake Forest
+343.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7072
Defenseman overall
#828
Defenseman born in 1984
#1570
in OHL

D1 Comparables

Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kim Hilmersson
Plymouth State · 2024-25
0.852 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nathan Garnier
SUNY Cortland · 2023-24
0.696 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Omar Mullan
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2013-14
1.286 Elite
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.