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

Lucas St. Louis

Position: Defense DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin Country: ?
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
2021-22 Brunswick NE-Prep 28 3 26 29 1.036 0.2922 0.2922 0.4739 0.4739
■ 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 Harvard D1 ECAC — 33 1 10 11 0.333
2024-25 Harvard D1 ECAC — 33 2 9 11 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.28
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2024-25 · Harvard
+20.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

18%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
55%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#3235
Defenseman overall
#112
in NE-Prep

D1 Comparables

Michael Kapla
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.49 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Ruslan Pedan
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Gustav Olofsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Will Butcher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Denver (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Cutler Martin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Michigan (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Josh Keizer
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2008-09
1.069 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Shane Shell
Hobart · 2018-19
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Mac Balson
Buffalo State · 2009-10
0.560 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.