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

Lukas Gillett Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-09-07 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
2014-15 Rosemount High USHS-MN 25 19 22 41 1.640 0.4415 0.4085 0.5250 0.5519
■ 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
2018-19 Augsburg D1 — SR 20 3 13 16 0.800
2018-19 Augsburg D3 MIAC SR 20 3 13 16 0.800
2017-18 Augsburg D3 MIAC JR 27 11 7 18 0.667
2016-17 Augsburg D3 MIAC SO 24 8 7 15 0.625
2015-16 Augsburg D3 MIAC FR 23 5 9 14 0.609
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.35
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.61
2015-16 · Augsburg
+74.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7166
Forward overall
#332
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

Jason Salvaggio
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tony Calderone
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.69 PPG
→ Michigan (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Osterberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.77 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Luke Johnson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.81 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Average
NCAAe PPG
Zach Aston-Reese
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kevin Leonard
Western New England · 2000-01
0.588 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Adam Tretowicz
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2016-17
0.720 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nikita Kozyrev
Buffalo State · 2016-17
1.231 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.