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

Vilho Saariluoma Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-07-14 Country: Finland
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
2018-19 — NAHL 54 5 14 19 0.352 0.1307 0.1308 0.3726 0.3729
2019-20 Odessa Jackalopes NAHL 28 5 11 16 0.571 0.2122 0.2122 0.6050 0.6050
■ 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
2020-21 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 BigTen FR 10 5 8 13 1.300
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.30
2020-21 · Wisconsin-River Falls
+1060.7% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

12%
NCAA D1
22%
NCAA D2/D3
28%
Age-Out / Club
38%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#18285
Forward overall
#689
Forward born in 1999
#1604
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Ben Greiner
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Robin Höglund
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Spencer Flansburg
SUNY Brockport · 2021-22
0.520 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kyle Taylor
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2006-07
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Curtis Carlson
Nichols · 2016-17
0.560 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.