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

Dennis Cesana Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1998-04-04 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
2016-17 Brooks Bandits AJHL 59 12 40 52 0.881 0.2956 0.3009 0.8156 0.8303
2017-18 Brooks Bandits AJHL 60 14 61 75 1.250 0.4192 0.4032 1.1567 1.1124
■ 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
2021-22 Michigan State D1 BigTen — 36 8 8 16 0.444
2020-21 Michigan State D1 BigTen JR 27 2 10 12 0.444
2019-20 Michigan State D1 BigTen SO 36 7 15 22 0.611
2018-19 Michigan State D1 BigTen FR 36 3 21 24 0.667
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.34
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.67
2018-19 · Michigan State
+94.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

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

NCAAe Rankings

#2228
Defenseman overall
#507
Defenseman born in 1998
#143
in AJHL

D1 Comparables

Connor Murphy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Cornell (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Barrett Kaib
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Providence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Victor Newell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Harvard (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Jared Kolquist
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Fleming
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lukas Ciotti
Adrian · 2009-10
0.778 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nick Marinac
SUNY Brockport · 2011-12
0.905 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Gavin Bloder
Fredonia · 2022-23
0.750 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.