← New Search ↗ Social Card

Adam Lang Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2005-08-22 Country: Canada
⚠️ Aging Out 2025-26: Turns 20 before Dec 31, 2025 — final eligible junior season.
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
2022-23 Spruce Grove Saints AJHL 42 0 12 12 0.286 0.0954 0.1037 0.2652 0.2883
2023-24 Spruce Grove Saints AJHL 46 2 21 23 0.500 0.1670 0.1737 0.4642 0.4827
2024-25 BCHL 50 4 21 25 0.500 0.1946 0.1930 0.7291 0.7230
2025-26 Cowichan Valley Capitals BCHL 50 7 31 38 0.760 0.2958 0.2824 1.1083 1.0583
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
2004-05 Saint Anselm D2 FR 3 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

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

NCAAe Rankings

#2798
Defenseman overall
#879
Defenseman born in 2005

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ UConn (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

SUNY Geneseo · 2001-02
1.042 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Utica · 2007-08
1.059 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Finlandia · 2003-04
1.478 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.