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

Edward Osowski Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-01-08 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
2011-12 Flint Jr. Generals NA3HL 48 24 38 62 1.292 0.1429 0.1426 0.4078 0.4069
2012-13 Flint Jr. Generals NA3HL 48 22 28 50 1.042 0.1152 0.1092 0.3289 0.3118
■ 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 Becker D3 — SO 18 3 2 5 0.278
2013-14 Becker D3 — FR 9 1 2 3 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.10
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2013-14 · Becker
+217.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#19748
Forward overall
#686
Forward born in 1993
#406
in NA3HL

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Stanislav Dzakhov
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kyle Collette
SUNY Brockport · 2017-18
0.250 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Matthew Wolf
Skidmore · 2015-16
0.423 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Anthony Annunziato
Lake Forest · 2011-12
0.520 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.