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

Gustav Lindgren Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1991-09-09 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
2009-10 Södertälje SK U20 SuperElit 42 7 5 12 0.286 0.1127 0.1152 0.3876 0.3963
2010-11 Södertälje SK U20 SHL-J20 42 5 11 16 0.381 0.2104 0.2028 0.5075 0.4891
■ 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
2014-15 Lawrence D3 NCHA SR 18 1 4 5 0.278
2013-14 Lawrence D3 NCHA JR 25 2 5 7 0.280
2012-13 Lawrence D3 NCHA SO 21 3 4 7 0.333
2011-12 Lawrence D3 NCHA FR 26 5 13 18 0.692
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.69
2011-12 · Lawrence
+382.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#33043
Forward overall
#1151
Forward born in 1991

D1 Comparables

Landon Smith
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.79 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jake Wood
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ RPI (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
C.J. Reuschlein
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ Army (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Conor Andrle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Army (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average
NCAAe PPG
Max McHugh
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jeffrey Gauld
Canton · 2016-17
0.818 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ron Lindgren
Aurora · 2012-13
0.750 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Neduzak
Wisconsin-Superior · 2011-12
0.429 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.