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

Travis Oleksuk Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1989-02-03 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
2006-07 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 56 6 16 22 0.393 0.2318 0.2424 1.1576 1.2106
2007-08 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 60 14 30 44 0.733 0.4326 0.4302 2.1604 2.1486
■ 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 Minnesota Duluth D1 WCHA-orig — 41 21 32 53 1.293
2010-11 Minnesota Duluth D1 WCHA-orig — 42 14 19 33 0.786
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.30
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.79
2010-11 · Minnesota Duluth
+158.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#10727
Forward overall
#383
Forward born in 1989
#1008
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Adam Gilmour
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Boston College (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Average
NCAAe PPG
Dave Gust
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.45 Average
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Papa
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.72 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.59 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jared Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.69 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cam Darcy
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.69 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nolan Redler
UMass Boston · 2015-16
1.125 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Ellis
SUNY Oswego · 2003-04
1.704 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Lucas Signoretti
Buffalo State · 2022-23
1.120 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.