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

Austin Rust Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-02-12 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 Carleton Place Canadians CCHL 5 1 1 2 0.400 0.1142 0.1140 0.3096 0.3089
2013-14 Kirkland Lake Gold Miners NOJHL 56 35 30 65 1.161 0.1957 0.1794 0.4823 0.4421
■ 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
2017-18 Adrian D3 NCHA SR 27 9 5 14 0.518
2016-17 Adrian D3 NCHA JR 20 4 6 10 0.500
2015-16 Adrian D3 NCHA SO 7 2 1 3 0.429
2014-15 Adrian D3 NCHA FR 18 1 7 8 0.444
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.44
2014-15 · Adrian
+238.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#20761
Forward overall
#792
Forward born in 1993

D1 Comparables

Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ricky DeRosa
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
Aidan Cavallini
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bradley Duwe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nick Minerva
Neumann · 2016-17
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Pearce Vance
Westfield State · 2015-16
0.476 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Joseph Drapluk
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2014-15
0.571 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.