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

Sebastian Rosendahl Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-01-06 Country: Sweden
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 Södertälje SK U20 SuperElit 31 12 5 17 0.548 0.2164 0.2231 0.7448 0.7679
2008-09 Södertälje SK U20 SuperElit 41 5 7 12 0.293 0.1155 0.1132 0.3975 0.3898
■ 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
2010-11 Finlandia D3 — FR 21 4 6 10 0.476
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2010-11 · Finlandia
+254.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#31646
Forward overall
#1148
Forward born in 1990

D1 Comparables

Tim Lappin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Brown (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average
NCAAe PPG
Seth Adams
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sebastian Weberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Colgate
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Canon Pieper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Austin Vieth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Regnars Udris
Buffalo State · 2017-18
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Sebastian Foster
Bowdoin · 2014-15
0.417 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Anthony Ruberto
Hamilton · 2007-08
0.440 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.