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

Austin Kosack Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1995-03-22 Country: Canada
Signed Professionally
Toronto Metro Univ. · USports-M

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 Burlington Cougars OJHL 42 2 21 23 0.548 0.1342 0.1486 0.3770 0.4175
2012-13 — OJHL 52 3 39 42 0.808 0.1980 0.2094 0.5561 0.5881
2013-14 Indiana Ice USHL 57 3 26 29 0.509 0.3001 0.2986 1.5281 1.5205
2014-15 North Bay Battalion OHL 31 2 4 6 0.194 0.1119 0.1054 0.4972 0.4681
2015-16 Moncton Wildcats QMJHL 34 5 16 21 0.618 0.3034 0.2717 1.6492 1.4768
2016-17 Toronto Metro Univ. USports-M 7 1 5 6 0.857 0.4522 0.4805 2.5122 2.6692
2017-18 Toronto Metro Univ. USports-M 0 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
■ 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
2014-15 Ferris State D1 WCHA FR 9 1 1 2 0.222
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.25
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.22
2014-15 · Ferris State
-10.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#4761
Defenseman overall
#831
Defenseman born in 1995

D1 Comparables

Paul LaDue
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Christopher Miraldo
Westfield State · 2022-23
1.037 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Zach Dill
Salem State · 2021-22
1.111 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Lucas Signoretti
Buffalo State · 2023-24
1.120 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.