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

Gregor Jennersjö Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-11-09 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
2023-24 Northeast Generals NAHL 39 0 3 3 0.077 0.0283 0.0289 0.0812 0.0830
2024-25 South Shore Kings NCDC 51 6 39 45 0.882 0.3598 0.3499 0.7093 0.6899
■ 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 Gustavus Adolphus D3 MIAC FR 15 0 3 3 0.200
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.20
2025-26 · Gustavus Adolphus
-4.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

50%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Club / ACHA
5%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#2698
Defenseman overall
#626
Defenseman born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Paul LaDue
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Benjamin Gallacher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Van Voorhis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Barrett Kaib
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Providence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nick Zilka
Hamline · 2006-07
0.760 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Payton Kender
Rivier · 2024-25
0.840 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Maxwell Reavis
UMass Boston · 2011-12
1.000 Elite
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.