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

Paul LaDue Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1992-09-06 Country: USA
2012 · Round 6, Pick #181  ·  Los Angeles Kings Los Angeles Kings
Signed Professionally
Rögle BK · SHL

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
2010-11 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 56 3 19 22 0.393 0.1444 0.1521 0.4147 0.4367
2011-12 Lincoln Stars USHL 56 9 25 34 0.607 0.3581 0.3467 1.8234 1.7653
2012-13 Lincoln Stars USHL 62 12 37 49 0.790 0.4662 0.4265 2.3736 2.1716
2024-25 MoDo Hockey SHL 50 5 12 17 0.340 0.8500 0.6149 4.4365 3.2096
2025-26 Rögle BK SHL 47 6 12 18 0.383 0.9575 0.9575 4.9976 4.9976
■ 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
2015-16 North Dakota D1 NCHC JR 41 5 14 19 0.463
2014-15 North Dakota D1 NCHC SO 41 5 17 22 0.537
2013-14 North Dakota D1 NCHC FR 41 6 15 21 0.512
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.37
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.51
2013-14 · North Dakota
+37.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

⭐ Elite profile — high probability of D1 placement; comparable to top-end prospects
12%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
88%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#402
Defenseman overall
#125
Defenseman born in 1992

D2/3 Comparables

Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Filimon Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 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.