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

T.J. Ahvenniemi Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1989-06-12 Country: Canada
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
2007-08 Notre Dame Hounds SJHL 45 5 6 11 0.244 0.0626 0.0650 0.1811 0.1881
2008-09 Neepawa Titans MJHL 38 12 6 18 0.474 0.0912 0.0895 0.2985 0.2930
2009-10 — MJHL 55 11 25 36 0.654 0.1260 0.1180 0.4125 0.3864
■ 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
2011-12 Wisconsin-Superior D3 — SO 9 2 1 3 0.333
2010-11 Wisconsin-Superior D3 — FR 15 1 2 3 0.200
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.10
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.20
2010-11 · Wisconsin-Superior
+98.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11830
Defenseman overall
#1271
Defenseman born in 1989

D1 Comparables

Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Adam Czarnecki
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2017-18
0.300 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Colin Raver
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2016-17
0.926 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Devin Mauro
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2024-25
0.333 Developing
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.