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

Dmitry Ermakov Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-07-28 Country: Russia
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
2011-12 Corpus Christi IceRays NAHL 28 3 11 14 0.500 0.1981 0.1978 0.5250 0.5241
■ 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
2016-17 Norwich D3 LittleEast SR 5 0 0 0 0.000
2015-16 Norwich D3 LittleEast JR 14 3 2 5 0.357
2014-15 Norwich D3 LittleEast SO 6 1 1 2 0.333
2013-14 Norwich D3 LittleEast FR 18 3 5 8 0.444
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.44
2013-14 · Norwich
+162.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#28472
Forward overall
#1055
Forward born in 1992
#2495
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Jake Wood
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ RPI (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Josh Erickson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Bobby Hineman
Adrian · 2005-06
0.714 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Lamison
Chatham · 2017-18
0.520 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jarrod Fitzpatrick
Utica · 2014-15
0.750 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.