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

Lucas Van Natter Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1989-07-05 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
2008-09 Aurora Tigers OJHL 49 17 27 44 0.898 0.2201 0.2124 0.6147 0.5932
2009-10 Aurora Tigers OJHL 56 39 57 96 1.714 0.4202 0.3835 1.1734 1.0708
■ 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
2013-14 Manhattanville D3 UCHC — 27 15 17 32 1.185
2012-13 Manhattanville D3 UCHC — 28 10 14 24 0.857
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.27
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.86
2012-13 · Manhattanville
+217.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#8174
Forward overall
#297
Forward born in 1989
#110
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Brandon Wahlin
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.33 PPG
→ UMass (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.45 Developing
NCAAe PPG
T.J. Sarcona
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.06 PPG
→ Niagara (0.58 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Justin Parizek
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Michael Huntebrinker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.49 Developing
NCAAe PPG
A.J. Reid
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.18 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nate Rein
Wisconsin-Superior · 2004-05
0.967 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Justin Joy
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2002-03
0.966 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Cole Stewart
Southern New Hampshire · 2017-18
0.462 Average
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.