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

Mark Konstantinov Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2008-05-27 Country: Russia
Merrimack
HockeyEast D1

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
2025-26 Brooks Bandits BCHL 26 2 3 5 0.192 0.0741 0.0810 0.2799 0.3059
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

28%
NCAA D1
8%
NCAA D2/D3
28%
Age-Out / Club
38%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#21970
Defenseman overall
#1145
Defenseman born in 2008
#3000
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

Luke Shiplo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.46 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Nash Worden
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.12 PPG
→ Army (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.07 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Teemu Kivihalme
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.25 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Scott Savage
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ Boston College (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Gage Ausmus
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

Merrimack Alumni similar profiles who attended this school

Hunter Mayo
WHL 2021-22
0.30
actual FR PPG at Merrimack
Evan Bell
NAHL 2014-15
0.40
actual FR PPG at Merrimack
Nathan King
BCHL 2021-22
0.18
actual FR PPG at Merrimack
Kevin Sadovski
USPHL-Elite 2016-17
0.00
actual FR PPG at Merrimack

D2/3 Comparables

Jeff Olitch
Wentworth · 2002-03
1.143 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Mathew Rehding
Adrian · 2016-17
0.609 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Leimbrock
SUNY Oswego · 2005-06
0.517 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.