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

Magnus Gadowsky Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2003-07-04 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
2022-23 Maryland Black Bears NAHL 36 0 4 4 0.111 0.0395 0.0396 0.1166 0.1169
2023-24 — NAHL 41 5 4 9 0.220 0.0780 0.0745 0.2305 0.2200
■ 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 Amherst D3 NESCAC SO 24 2 2 4 0.167
2024-25 Amherst D3 NESCAC — 23 3 4 7 0.304
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.30
2024-25 · Amherst
+487.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

15%
NCAA D1
10%
NCAA D2/D3
70%
Age-Out / Club
2%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#53303
Forward overall
#3639
Forward born in 2003
#6143
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Michael McIntosh
Amherst · 2003-04
0.640 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Billy Fetherston
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2001-02
0.231 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Paolo Dipasquale
St. Norbert · 2001-02
0.538 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.