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

Cameron Crawford Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2007-07-11 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
2023-24 Durham West Jr. Lightning OWHL-U22 33 5 3 8 0.242 0.0847 0.0847 — —
2024-25 Durham West Jr. Lightning OWHL-U22 18 6 11 17 0.944 0.3302 0.3302 — —
■ 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 Merrimack D1 HEA-W — 17 0 2 2 0.118
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.12
2025-26 · Merrimack
-40.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

30%
NCAA D1
8%
NCAA D2/D3
62%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#3245
Forward overall
#103
Forward born in 2007
#160
in OWHL-U22

D1 Comparables

Emily Bergland
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.04 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Catherine Skaja
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Rebekah Kolstad
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.09 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sylvia Marolt
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.12 PPG
→ Bemidji State
0.34 No data
NCAAe PPG
Demi Gardner
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.12 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Emily Bergland
Bemidji State ·
0.114 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Catherine Skaja
Minnesota ·
0.342 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Rebekah Kolstad
North Dakota ·
0.057 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.