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

Arturas Laukaitis Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-03-05 Country: Lithuania
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
2015-16 Atlanta Capitals NA3HL 45 34 43 77 1.711 0.2062 0.2102 — —
2017-18 — NAHL 41 9 7 16 0.390 0.1449 0.1344 0.4131 0.3832
■ 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 Wisconsin-Stout D3 BigTen FR 27 10 8 18 0.667
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.67
2018-19 · Wisconsin-Stout
+372.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

8%
NCAA D1
32%
NCAA D2/D3
60%
Age-Out / Club
0%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#24369
Forward overall
#1061
Forward born in 1997

D1 Comparables

Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ricky DeRosa
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
Bob Kinne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bradley Duwe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Aidan Cavallini
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Bryce Witman
Fredonia · 2018-19
0.150 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Joel Whited
Wisconsin-Stout · 2007-08
0.571 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Zepeda
St. Norbert · 2011-12
0.821 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.