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

Alex Rauter Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-06-17 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
2012-13 Omaha Lancers USHL 27 7 4 11 0.407 0.2594 0.2604 1.2209 1.2254
2013-14 — USHL 24 2 6 8 0.333 0.2122 0.2031 0.9988 0.9558
■ 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
2017-18 Cornell D1 ECAC SR 32 11 9 20 0.625
2016-17 Cornell D1 ECAC JR 35 8 9 17 0.486
2015-16 Cornell D1 ECAC SO 21 1 3 4 0.191
2014-15 Cornell D1 ECAC FR 5 0 2 2 0.400
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.40
2014-15 · Cornell
+106.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#17478
Forward overall
#715
Forward born in 1994
#2538
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG
Robin Höglund
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Matt Galati
SUNY Oswego · 2011-12
1.241 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Chris Berry
Wisconsin-Superior · 2004-05
1.111 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
JC Humphreys
SUNY Cortland · 2023-24
0.481 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.