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

Lou Educate Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-03-13 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
2010-11 — NAHL 57 26 26 52 0.912 0.3352 0.3113 0.9629 0.8943
■ 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 Utica D3 UCHC — 26 12 14 26 1.000
2013-14 Utica D3 UCHC — 27 6 12 18 0.667
2012-13 Utica D3 UCHC — 28 18 18 36 1.286
2011-12 Nichols D3 CNE — 27 27 15 42 1.556
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.27
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.56
2011-12 · Nichols
+483.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11043
Forward overall
#454
Forward born in 1990
#310
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Carlos Amestoy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Walchuk
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Harrison Niemann
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2007-08
0.750 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Peter Henderson
Marian · 2015-16
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Otis Goldman
Castleton · 2015-16
0.579 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.