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

Jack Karlsson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2001-09-20 Country: Sweden
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
2020-21 Färjestad BK U20 SHL-J20 15 1 2 3 0.200 0.1116 0.1116 0.2882 0.2882
2021-22 New Jersey Jr. Titans NAHL 53 3 15 18 0.340 0.1261 0.1213 0.3596 0.3460
■ 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
2025-26 Stevenson D3 MAC SR 27 4 20 24 0.889
2024-25 Stevenson D3 MAC JR 27 5 13 18 0.667
2023-24 Stevenson D3 MAC SO 27 2 10 12 0.444
2022-23 Stevenson D3 MAC FR 24 1 8 9 0.375
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.38
2022-23 · Stevenson
+227.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

8%
NCAA D1
35%
NCAA D2/D3
57%
Age-Out / Club
0%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#10209
Defenseman overall
#1458
Defenseman born in 2001

D1 Comparables

Jake Flynn
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ UConn (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Zink
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Tino Alunni
Lebanon Valley · 2017-18
0.423 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Fralich
St. Scholastica · 2016-17
0.518 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jared Bromberg
Gustavus Adolphus · 2015-16
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.