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

Luca Fasciano Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-07-10 Country: Canada
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 Markham Royals OJHL 0 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2021-22 Markham Royals OJHL 53 5 16 21 0.396 0.1190 0.1222 0.2712 0.2785
2022-23 — OJHL 53 13 30 43 0.811 0.2437 0.2378 0.5553 0.5419
2023-24 Corpus Christi IceRays NAHL 59 3 14 17 0.288 0.1141 0.1090 0.3025 0.2890
■ 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 Michigan Tech D1 CCHA SO 29 5 4 9 0.310
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.31
2025-26 · Michigan Tech
+104.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

32%
NCAA D1
8%
NCAA D2/D3
55%
Age-Out / Club
2%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#10011
Defenseman overall
#2181
Defenseman born in 2003

D1 Comparables

Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jeff Lumsden
Fredonia · 2001-02
0.476 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Oliver Arnberg
Nichols · 2016-17
0.304 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Hoy
Adrian · 2012-13
0.600 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.