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

William Elias Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-01-28 Country: USA
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 Madison Capitols USHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2022-23 Cowichan Valley Capitals BCHL 52 5 20 25 0.481 0.1791 0.1719 0.7006 0.6723
■ 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 Holy Cross D1 AHA — 38 2 16 18 0.474
2024-25 Holy Cross D1 AHA — 32 5 7 12 0.375
2023-24 Holy Cross D1 AHA — 1 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

42%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
22%
Age-Out / Club
30%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#8070
Defenseman overall
#1872
Defenseman born in 2003

D1 Comparables

Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Everson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Harvard (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Joseph Fiala
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Parker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Vinny Muto
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Niagara (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nolan Zotter
Canton · 2022-23
0.545 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kailin Chen
UMass Dartmouth · 2023-24
1.454 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Gage Christianson
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2011-12
0.741 Strong
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.