← New Search ↗ Social Card

George Peterson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-06-05 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 Hermantown USHS-MN 19 0 2 2 0.105 0.0133 0.0133 0.0256 0.0256
2020-21 Hermantown USHS-MN 19 4 5 9 0.474 0.0600 0.0600 0.1151 0.1151
2021-22 Hermantown USHS-MN 31 10 13 23 0.742 0.0939 0.0939 0.1802 0.1802
2022-23 Hermantown USHS-MN 31 13 30 43 1.387 0.1756 0.1756 0.3369 0.3369
2023-24 NAHL 38 0 8 8 0.210 0.0773 0.0774 0.2222 0.2224
2024-25 Chippewa Steel NAHL 54 6 17 23 0.426 0.1565 0.1484 0.4495 0.4263
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 Bethel D3 MIAC FR 26 2 10 12 0.462
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.46
2025-26 · Bethel
+307.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

25%
NCAA D1
15%
NCAA D2/D3
42%
Age-Out / Club
18%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#7480
Defenseman overall
#1774
Defenseman born in 2004

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Skidmore · 2024-25
0.556 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Becker · 2010-11
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Morrisville · 2005-06
0.667 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.