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

Cole Lussier Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-02-14 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
2013-14 Soo Eagles NAHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2014-15 Soo Eagles NAHL 3 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2015-16 Renfrew Wolves CCHL 60 7 10 17 0.283 0.0614 0.0620 0.2192 0.2213
2016-17 Amarillo Bulls NAHL 59 4 7 11 0.186 0.0685 0.0667 0.1967 0.1917
■ 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
2017-18 Trine D3 NCHA — 15 2 0 2 0.133
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.13
2017-18 · Trine
+140.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#50935
Forward overall
#2605
Forward born in 1997
#5837
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Stanislav Dzakhov
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Ben Ostlie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
William Messa
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Northeastern
0.12 No data
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Ray Nicks
Lebanon Valley · 2005-06
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor Portner
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2011-12
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Eddie Shepler
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2022-23
0.560 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.