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

Andrew Froese Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1997-08-20 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
2015-16 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 3 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2016-17 Corpus Christi IceRays NAHL 19 0 4 4 0.210 0.0782 0.0782 0.2229 0.2229
2017-18 Nepean Raiders CCHL 14 4 4 8 0.571 0.1631 0.1519 0.4423 0.4119
■ 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
2022-23 Saint Mary's D3 MIAC SR 20 3 1 4 0.200
2021-22 Saint Mary's D3 MIAC JR 21 2 1 3 0.143
2020-21 Saint Mary's D3 — SO 9 4 5 9 1.000
2018-19 Finlandia D3 — FR 12 2 2 4 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2018-19 · Finlandia
+188.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

18%
NCAA D1
32%
NCAA D2/D3
50%
Age-Out / Club
0%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#8724
Defenseman overall
#1393
Defenseman born in 1997

D1 Comparables

Jake Flynn
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ UConn (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Casey Nelson
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Zink
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Gavin Payne
St. Thomas · 2016-17
0.600 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Carmine Taffo
Trine · 2016-17
0.261 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Morin
Wisconsin-Stout · 2007-08
0.871 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.