← New Search ↗ Social Card

Charlie Erickson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2002-02-21 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 Duluth East USHS-MN 25 12 13 25 1.000 0.1232 0.1232 0.2429 0.2429
2020-21 Granite City Lumberjacks NA3HL 4 3 0 3 0.750 0.0829 0.0829 0.2376 0.2376
2021-22 Minnesota Wilderness NAHL 49 7 11 18 0.367 0.1305 0.1283 0.3856 0.3792
2022-23 Minnesota Wilderness NAHL 56 6 15 21 0.375 0.1332 0.1244 0.3937 0.3678
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 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 WIAC JR 15 0 0 0 0.000
2024-25 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 WIAC SO 17 2 3 5 0.294
2023-24 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 WIAC FR 12 1 1 2 0.167
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.17
2023-24 · Wisconsin-Eau Claire
+54.6% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

30%
NCAA D1
10%
NCAA D2/D3
52%
Age-Out / Club
8%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#32183
Forward overall
#1908
Forward born in 2002

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Canton · 2015-16
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
St. Thomas · 2018-19
0.474 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Amherst · 2011-12
0.389 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.