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

Leo Cabulis Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-12-26 Country: Latvia
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
2024-25 Minot Minotauros NAHL 42 7 7 14 0.333 0.1184 0.1156 0.3499 0.3416
■ 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 Alvernia D3 MAC — 25 7 5 12 0.480
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.10
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2025-26 · Alvernia
+384.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

12%
NCAA D1
32%
NCAA D2/D3
40%
Age-Out / Club
12%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#39975
Forward overall
#2562
Forward born in 2004
#4207
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

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
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Stanislav Dzakhov
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Matt Hanewall
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2017-18
0.864 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
David MacGregor
UMass Boston · 2014-15
0.419 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Gieseler
Adrian · 2009-10
0.500 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.