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

Gustav Olofsson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1994-12-01 Country: Sweden
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 — USHL 3 0 1 1 0.333 0.2049 0.2213 0.9820 1.0604
2012-13 — USHL 63 2 21 23 0.365 0.2244 0.2304 1.0757 1.1043
■ 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
2013-14 Colorado College D1 NCHC — 30 4 4 8 0.267
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.27
2013-14 · Colorado College
+24.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5380
Defenseman overall
#956
Defenseman born in 1994
#2425
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Ruslan Pedan
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Garrett Cecere
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.09 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Clint Lewis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.30 PPG
→ Cornell (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Will Butcher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Denver (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jack Stander
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Canisius (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Anthony Marra
SUNY Geneseo · 2012-13
1.161 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Kero
Saint John's · 2014-15
0.480 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brent Wold
Utica · 2010-11
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.