← New Search ↗ Social Card

Trevor Stokes Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2000-09-01 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
2018-19 Butte Irish NA3HL 22 1 8 9 0.409 0.0513 0.0533 0.1292 0.1343
2019-20 USPHL-Premier 42 5 27 32 0.762 0.0997 0.0997 0.2586 0.2586
2020-21 Wooster Oilers USPHL-Premier 35 5 13 18 0.514 0.0673 0.0673 0.1746 0.1746
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 University of Toledo ACHA_D1 4 1 1 2 0.500
2024-25 University of Toledo ACHA_D1 4 1 1 2 0.500
2023-24 University of Toledo ACHA_D1 4 1 1 2 0.500
2022-23 University of Toledo ACHA_D1 4 1 1 2 0.500
2021-22 University of Toledo ACHA_D1 4 1 1 2 0.500
2020-21 University of Toledo ACHA_D1 4 1 1 2 0.500
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.50
2020-21 · University of Toledo
+894.0% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

0%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
92%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#8326
Defenseman overall
#1612
Defenseman born in 2000

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.10 PPG
→ Air Force (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Air Force (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Average D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Canisius (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Boston University (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Trine · 2016-17
0.625 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Williams · 2017-18
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Hobart · 2017-18
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.