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

T.J. Ezzard Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2001-11-07 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
2020-21 Boston Dukes EHL 11 1 0 1 0.091 0.0133 0.0133 0.0446 0.0446
2021-22 Protec Jr. Ducks EHL 45 1 14 15 0.333 0.0488 0.0483 0.1634 0.1617
■ 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
2025-26 Neumann D3 MAC SR 26 0 1 1 0.038
2024-25 Neumann D3 MAC JR 26 0 3 3 0.115
2023-24 Neumann D3 MAC SO 24 0 6 6 0.250
2022-23 Neumann D3 MAC FR 14 0 1 1 0.071
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.07
2022-23 · Neumann
+56.6% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

12%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#19795
Defenseman overall
#3007
Defenseman born in 2001
#2403
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Kyle McKenzie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Fuller
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.11 PPG
→ Southern Maine (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Eric Hansen
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2004-05
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Sean Kacerosky
SUNY Potsdam · 2013-14
0.250 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Griffiths
Saint Mary's (MN) · 2009-10
0.200 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.