← New Search ↗ Social Card

Alexander Dimitriadis Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-08-06 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
2021-22 North York Rangers OJHL 53 12 12 24 0.453 0.1110 0.1200 0.3118 0.3370
2022-23 OJHL 49 19 25 44 0.898 0.2201 0.2266 0.6183 0.6367
2023-24 Blackfalds Bulldogs AJHL 43 15 16 31 0.721 0.2418 0.2388 0.6671 0.6589
2024-25 BCHL 51 8 17 25 0.490 0.1889 0.1775 0.7134 0.6703
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 Mercyhurst D1 AHA FR 28 3 2 5 0.179
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.18
2025-26 · Mercyhurst
+3.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

28%
NCAA D1
30%
NCAA D2/D3
30%
Age-Out / Club
12%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#22305
Forward overall
#1222
Forward born in 2004

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Augsburg · 2018-19
0.739 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Norwich · 2022-23
0.400 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Neumann · 2016-17
0.389 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.