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

Cody Kostecki Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1991-06-04 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
2009-10 Portage Terriers MJHL 52 5 10 15 0.288 0.0784 0.0812 0.1818 0.1883
2010-11 Portage Terriers MJHL 56 5 13 18 0.321 0.0874 0.0863 0.2025 0.1999
2011-12 Portage Terriers MJHL 57 7 25 32 0.561 0.1526 0.1429 0.3538 0.3314
■ 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
2012-13 Concordia D3 MIAC — 10 2 5 7 0.700
2012-13 Concordia (WI) D3 — FR 10 2 5 7 0.700
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.70
2012-13 · Concordia
+516.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#14806
Defenseman overall
#1547
Defenseman born in 1991
#1295
in MJHL

D1 Comparables

Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Trevor Jestadt
Finlandia · 2016-17
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Dan McCauley
Bethel · 2004-05
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Cosmos
UMass Boston · 2003-04
0.500 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.