Austin Rueschhoff Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-09-09 Country: USA

Set Commitment

School

Type

Date (optional)

Detected conference: () — projections will update automatically.

Notes (optional)

Projecting as:

Show:

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	—	NAHL	26	5	2	7	0.269	0.0989	0.1089	—	—
2015-16	Austin Bruins	NAHL	52	19	12	31	0.596	0.2190	0.2315	0.6293	0.6652
2016-17	Dubuque Fighting Saints	USHL	57	17	10	27	0.474	0.2794	0.2715	1.4227	1.3826
2024-25	Kärpät	Liiga	60	17	13	30	0.500	1.2500	1.2130	4.2980	4.1708

■ 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	Western Michigan	D1	NCHC	JR	36	12	14	26	0.722
2018-19	Western Michigan	D1	NCHC	SO	36	13	14	27	0.750
2017-18	Western Michigan	D1	NCHC	FR	33	10	7	17	0.515

Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year

Projected PPG

0.22

before college

→

Actual FR PPG

0.52

2017-18 · Western Michigan

+135.6% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

🏒 NHL / Pro Track — production profile is consistent with players who bypassed or minimized college hockey

NCAA D1

NCAA D2/D3

100%

NHL / Pro

NCAAe Rankings

D2/3 Comparables

Neil Trimm

Neumann · 2003-04

1.800 Elite

actual D2/3 PPG

Arkhip Ledenkov

St. Scholastica · 2018-19

1.636 Elite

actual D2/3 PPG

Brandon Osmundson

Utica · 2018-19

1.448 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.