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

Patrick Khodorenko Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1998-10-13 Country: USA
Signed Professionally
Lukko · Liiga

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
2014-15 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 55 13 20 33 0.600 0.4772 0.4984 2.2471 2.3471
2015-16 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 43 7 6 13 0.302 0.2404 0.2398 1.1322 1.1294
2024-25 Lukko Liiga 60 15 19 34 0.567 — — — —
■ 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
2019-20 Michigan State D1 BigTen SR 36 16 17 33 0.917
2018-19 Michigan State D1 BigTen JR 36 18 19 37 1.028
2017-18 Michigan State D1 BigTen SO 36 13 19 32 0.889
2016-17 Michigan State D1 BigTen FR 35 7 11 18 0.514
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.29
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.51
2016-17 · Michigan State
+75.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Shane Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Average
NCAAe PPG
Biagio Lerario
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Connor Hurley
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alec Marsh
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Penn State (0.57 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Joel L'Esperance
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.59 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brent Wold
Utica · 2010-11
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Gage Dill
Curry · 2017-18
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Luke Moodie
SUNY Oswego · 2005-06
0.926 Strong
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.