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

Curtis Sernoskie Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1989-06-23 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
2006-07 Brockville Braves CCHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2007-08 Ottawa Jr. Senators CCHL 47 3 9 12 0.255 0.0554 0.0566 0.1975 0.2017
■ 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 Assumption D2 NE10 — 10 2 1 3 0.300
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.30
2010-11 · Assumption
+519.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#50920
Forward overall
#1710
Forward born in 1989
#1596
in CCHL

D1 Comparables

Jason Ford
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Gage Torrel
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG
Adam Johnson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.46 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG
Josh Nenadal
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.30 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan McMurphy
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Bentley (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Trevor Elliott
SUNY Geneseo · 2004-05
0.200 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Garrett Suter
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2005-06
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Cody Kostecki
Concordia · 2009-10
0.700 Strong
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.