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

Hunter Canestra Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-03-31 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 Philadelphia Jr. Flyers EHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2016-17 Northeast Generals NAHL 31 4 5 9 0.290 0.1067 0.1153 0.3064 0.3311
2017-18 — NAHL 51 6 10 16 0.314 0.1153 0.1189 0.3311 0.3414
2018-19 Philadelphia Revolution EHL 37 21 19 40 1.081 0.2497 0.2484 0.5290 0.5262
■ 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
2019-20 Lebanon Valley D1 MAC FR 3 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 Lebanon Valley D3 MAC — 3 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

18%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
28%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#22926
Forward overall
#1136
Forward born in 1999
#552
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Evan Janssen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Denver (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Gage Hough
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eric Freschi
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.51 PPG
→ Cornell (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Devin Loe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.85 PPG
→ Miami (0.71 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Tommy Schutt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Edward Griffin
Wentworth · 2016-17
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Tim Kielich
SUNY Brockport · 2013-14
1.192 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Joe Drabin
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2014-15
0.846 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.