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

Cole Schneider Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2002-05-22 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
2019-20 — NAHL 41 4 7 11 0.268 0.0986 0.0986 0.2832 0.2832
2020-21 El Paso Rhinos NA3HL 39 25 35 60 1.538 0.1931 0.1931 0.4857 0.4857
2021-22 — NAHL 43 12 13 25 0.581 0.2136 0.2127 0.6137 0.6111
2022-23 Wisconsin Windigo NAHL 7 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
■ 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
2024-25 Augsburg D3 MIAC — 21 1 1 2 0.095
2023-24 Lawrence D3 NCHA — 25 7 12 19 0.760
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.76
2023-24 · Lawrence
+278.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

42%
NCAA D1
8%
NCAA D2/D3
12%
Age-Out / Club
38%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#4563
Defenseman overall
#1162
Defenseman born in 2002
#1524
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Christopher Dienes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Tucker Poolman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jared Kolquist
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dan Molenaar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Victor Björkung
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Caleb Suderman
Concordia · 2008-09
0.630 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Don Olivieri
Utica · 2010-11
0.815 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Salvatore Cerrato
Utica · 2023-24
0.690 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.