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

Hudson Fasching Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-07-28 Country: USA
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
2011-12 — NTDP-U18 55 16 20 36 0.654 0.5206 0.5411 2.4512 2.5477
2012-13 — NTDP-U18 62 10 23 33 0.532 0.4234 0.4179 1.9936 1.9679
■ 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 Minnesota D1 BigTen JR 37 20 18 38 1.027
2014-15 Minnesota D1 BigTen SO 38 12 14 26 0.684
2013-14 Minnesota D1 BigTen FR 40 14 16 30 0.750
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.40
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.75
2013-14 · Minnesota
+87.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7768
Forward overall
#274
Forward born in 1995

D1 Comparables

Avery Peterson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Galt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Karson Kuhlman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.56 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Average
NCAAe PPG
Connor Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.49 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Weis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brycon Johnson
Bryn Athyn · 2014-15
0.778 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Justin Fox
Salem State · 2005-06
1.429 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Logan DiScanio
New England · 2017-18
1.000 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.