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

Steven Sorensen Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1991-12-15 Country: USA
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
2010-11 Winkler Flyers MJHL 57 7 6 13 0.228 0.0439 0.0445 0.1438 0.1458
2011-12 Winkler Flyers MJHL 62 11 33 44 0.710 0.1366 0.1316 0.4475 0.4311
■ 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
2015-16 St. Thomas D3 CCHA SR 26 2 10 12 0.462
2014-15 St. Thomas D3 CCHA JR 25 0 14 14 0.560
2013-14 St. Thomas D3 CCHA SO 27 3 6 9 0.333
2012-13 St. Thomas D3 CCHA FR 14 2 3 5 0.357
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.09
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.36
2012-13 · St. Thomas
+291.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11968
Defenseman overall
#1355
Defenseman born in 1991
#842
in MJHL

D1 Comparables

Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG
Kyle McKenzie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kevin Galan
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2004-05
0.839 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Zach Remers
Buffalo State · 2015-16
0.783 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ethan Look
Lawrence · 2023-24
0.565 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.