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

Aaron Swanson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-05-10 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
2017-18 Amarillo Bulls NAHL 22 1 0 1 0.045 0.0167 0.0173 0.0480 0.0498
2018-19 — NAHL 44 7 19 26 0.591 0.2171 0.2153 0.6237 0.6186
2019-20 — NAHL 43 15 15 30 0.698 0.2563 0.2563 0.7364 0.7364
■ 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
2023-24 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 WIAC SR 28 5 5 10 0.357
2022-23 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 WIAC JR 23 2 7 9 0.391
2020-21 St. Thomas D3 CCHA FR 7 1 2 3 0.429
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.43
2020-21 · St. Thomas
+267.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

45%
NCAA D1
8%
NCAA D2/D3
18%
Age-Out / Club
30%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#27229
Forward overall
#1405
Forward born in 1999
#2300
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Tommy Schutt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Average
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Hansen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.25 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Matt Kroska
St. Olaf · 2012-13
0.375 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brett Everson
Utica · 2015-16
0.895 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Tristen May
Hamline · 2024-25
0.640 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.