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

Jan Olenginski Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-03-23 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
2019-20 Loomis Chaffee NE-Prep 28 1 4 5 0.179 0.0345 0.0345 0.0817 0.0817
2021-22 El Paso Rhinos NAHL 55 4 21 25 0.455 0.1614 0.1674 0.4772 0.4951
2022-23 Madison Capitols USHL 34 3 7 10 0.294 0.1735 0.1639 0.8665 0.8186
■ 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 St. Lawrence D1 ECAC JR 32 1 5 6 0.188
2024-25 St. Lawrence D1 ECAC JR 30 2 4 6 0.200
2023-24 St. Lawrence D1 ECAC SO 23 3 2 5 0.217
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.22
2023-24 · St. Lawrence
+39.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

65%
NCAA D1
10%
NCAA D2/D3
15%
Age-Out / Club
10%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#10532
Defenseman overall
#2243
Defenseman born in 2003

D1 Comparables

Vinny Muto
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Niagara (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Johnny Hrabovsky
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Victor Björkung
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Max Everson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Harvard (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Aleksi Rossi
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ Brown
0.08 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Austin Miller
UMass Dartmouth · 2017-18
0.963 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Kevin Van Bokkelen
Lebanon Valley · 2016-17
0.550 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Cam Doull
Lake Forest · 2001-02
0.893 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.