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

Erik Nilsson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1999-01-02 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
2016-17 Islanders Hockey Club USPHL-Premier-Classic 3 0 1 1 0.333 0.0936 0.1020 0.2745 0.2990
2017-18 Odessa Jackalopes NAHL 17 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2018-19 Boston Jr. Rangers EHL 40 6 13 19 0.475 0.1672 0.1643 0.2329 0.2289
■ 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 Lake Forest D3 NCHA SR 5 0 1 1 0.200
2021-22 Lake Forest D3 NCHA JR 12 1 2 3 0.250
2020-21 Lake Forest D3 NCHA SO 6 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 Lake Forest D3 NCHA FR 8 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

18%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
20%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#17630
Defenseman overall
#2791
Defenseman born in 1999

D1 Comparables

Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.18 No data
NCAAe PPG
Joseph Fiala
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Kyle McKenzie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brett Stirling
Connecticut College · 2016-17
0.364 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Dan Sherer
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2011-12
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew Johnston
SUNY Brockport · 2003-04
0.000 No data
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.