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

Drew Olson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1990-04-04 Country: USA
2008 · Round 4, Pick #118  ·  Columbus Blue Jackets Columbus Blue Jackets
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
2008-09 Omaha Lancers USHL 39 2 6 8 0.205 0.1210 0.1220 0.6160 0.6209
■ 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
2012-13 Minnesota Duluth D1 WCHA-orig SR 38 1 6 7 0.184
2011-12 Minnesota Duluth D1 WCHA-orig JR 41 1 7 8 0.195
2010-11 Minnesota Duluth D1 WCHA-orig SO 34 1 3 4 0.118
2009-10 Minnesota Duluth D1 NCHC FR 34 0 2 2 0.059
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.06
2009-10 · Minnesota Duluth
-49.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13435
Defenseman overall
#1491
Defenseman born in 1990
#3565
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Zach Frye
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.19 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Dane Cooper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Brown (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Justin Wade
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.10 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tim Davison
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Chris Buchanan
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ Bentley (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Dennis Davidson
Tufts · 2023-24
0.522 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Cadyn Campbell
Saint John's · 2022-23
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Ramm
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2021-22
0.588 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.