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

Filip Karlsson Tägtström Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-07-14 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
2017-18 Växjö Lakers HC U20 SuperElit 41 6 26 32 0.780 0.3080 0.3093 1.0600 1.0644
2018-19 Södertälje SK U20 SuperElit 29 15 22 37 1.276 0.5035 0.4811 1.7328 1.6556
2019-20 Sioux Falls Stampede USHL 7 0 2 2 0.286 0.1685 0.1685 0.8581 0.8581
■ 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
2022-23 Merrimack D1 HockeyEast — 2 0 1 1 0.500
2021-22 Merrimack D1 HockeyEast — 18 3 4 7 0.389
2020-21 Merrimack D1 NE10 — 9 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

40%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
10%
Age-Out / Club
50%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#4299
Forward overall
#173
Forward born in 1999

D1 Comparables

Riley Bourbonnais
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.78 PPG
→ RPI (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sam Rothstein
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.57 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG
J.T. Stenglein
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Michigan (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.59 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sam Anas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.98 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (1.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.55 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Thomas Forgione
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.70 PPG
→ Vermont (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Pat Egan
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2013-14
1.080 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Dante Spagnuolo
Adrian · 2017-18
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Connor Armour
Adrian · 2013-14
1.357 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.