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

Ethan Wyttenbach Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2007-02-10 Country: USA
2025 NHL Draft Round 5, Pick #144  ·  Calgary Flames Calgary Flames
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
2024-25 Sioux Falls Stampede USHL 44 24 27 51 1.159 0.7125 0.7398 3.4149 3.5459
■ 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 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC FR 40 25 34 59 1.475
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.69
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.48
2025-26 · Quinnipiac
+114.2% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

80%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Age-Out / Club
18%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#2879
Forward overall
#11
Forward born in 2007
#56
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Anthony Louis
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Miami (0.69 D1 FR PPG)
0.66 Strong
NCAAe PPG
J.T. Compher
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.14 PPG
→ Michigan (0.89 D1 FR PPG)
0.73 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Kelleher
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.65 Average
NCAAe PPG
Zach Diamantoni
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.63 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Trevor Moore
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.02 PPG
→ Denver (0.76 D1 FR PPG)
0.65 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Filimon Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 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.