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

Conrad Fondrk Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2007-06-01 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
2023-24 — NTDP-U18 54 20 25 45 0.833 0.6628 0.6814 3.1209 3.2085
2024-25 — NTDP-U18 40 13 14 27 0.675 0.5369 0.5267 2.5280 2.4801
■ 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 Boston University D1 HockeyEast — 25 3 5 8 0.320
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.55
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.32
2025-26 · Boston University
-41.6% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

85%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
5%
Age-Out / Club
10%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#2792
Forward overall
#69
Forward born in 2007

D1 Comparables

Matthew Weis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Sean Malone
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Harvard (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.51 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Gabe Guertler
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.85 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.57 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Hudson Fasching
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.53 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.75 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Motte
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Michigan (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nick Ford
Elmira · 2014-15
0.800 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Joseph Fiorino
Southern New Hampshire · 2016-17
0.593 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Reifler
Elmira · 2016-17
1.067 Elite
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.