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

Nick Sajevic Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2003-01-15 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
2020-21 Gentry Academy USHS-MN 19 25 19 44 2.316 0.6234 0.6234 0.5625 0.5625
2021-22 Chippewa Steel NAHL 60 18 25 43 0.717 0.2840 0.2920 0.7525 0.7738
2022-23 Nanaimo Clippers BCHL 26 4 5 9 0.346 0.1290 0.1235 — —
2023-24 Janesville Jets NAHL 50 25 34 59 1.180 0.4675 0.4354 1.2389 1.1539
■ 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 Air Force D1 AHA SO 37 9 23 32 0.865
2024-25 Air Force D1 AHA — 20 2 5 7 0.350
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.27
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.35
2024-25 · Air Force
+31.6% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

28%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
62%
Age-Out / Club
10%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#14046
Forward overall
#683
Forward born in 2003

D1 Comparables

Trevor Mingoia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Union (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.49 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Walchuk
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
Carlos Amestoy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
Shane Sooth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

David Italiano
Williams · 2013-14
0.880 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Anders Grongstad
Worcester State · 2021-22
0.808 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Carlson
Wilkes · 2021-22
0.840 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.