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

Nick Guran Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1987-06-20 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
2007-08 Fairbanks Ice Dogs NAHL 25 11 10 21 0.840 0.2985 0.2785 0.8860 0.8267
■ 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
2010-11 Augsburg D3 MIAC GR 24 19 15 34 1.417
2009-10 Augsburg D3 MIAC SR 27 18 15 33 1.222
2008-09 Augsburg D3 MIAC JR 26 16 15 31 1.192
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.24
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.19
2008-09 · Augsburg
+400.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13255
Forward overall
#456
Forward born in 1987
#485
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Justin Parizek
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
T.J. Sarcona
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.06 PPG
→ Niagara (0.58 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lucas Michaud
Trinity · 2017-18
0.893 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nicholas Bennett
Elmira · 2024-25
0.739 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Soik
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2006-07
1.346 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.