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

Charlie Aus Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1991-09-13 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 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 48 0 9 9 0.188 0.0743 0.0746 0.1969 0.1977
2011-12 — NAHL 55 6 20 26 0.473 0.1873 0.1788 0.4963 0.4738
■ 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
2015-16 Concordia D3 MIAC SR 23 2 13 15 0.652
2014-15 Concordia D3 MIAC JR 26 2 12 14 0.538
2013-14 Concordia D3 MIAC SO 25 3 5 8 0.320
2012-13 Concordia D3 MIAC FR 13 0 5 5 0.385
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.38
2012-13 · Concordia
+197.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11605
Defenseman overall
#1333
Defenseman born in 1991
#4058
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Benjamin Gallacher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.18 No data
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Ben Gamache
Hobart · 2011-12
0.560 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Finn Theriault
Nazareth · 2024-25
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Dave Lewandowski
Wentworth · 2004-05
0.857 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.