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

Tye Battipaglia Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-11-24 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
2023-24 South Shore Kings USPHL-Premier 12 3 2 5 0.417 0.0470 0.0476 0.1418 0.1436
2024-25 Worcester Jr. Railers NCDC 50 14 14 28 0.560 0.1294 0.1261 0.4528 0.4413
■ 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 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC — 25 14 15 29 1.160
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.16
2025-26 · Fitchburg State
+1330.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

38%
NCAA D2/D3
8%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#22363
Forward overall
#1223
Forward born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Ian Zaleski
Becker · 2018-19
0.476 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Zach Blake
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2010-11
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kyle Stroh
St. Norbert · 2008-09
0.481 Average
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.