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

Colton Brausen Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-04-30 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
2013-14 Swan Valley Stampeders MJHL 52 5 7 12 0.231 0.0653 0.0674 0.1454 0.1500
2014-15 Swan Valley Stampeders MJHL 58 9 20 29 0.500 0.1414 0.1385 0.3150 0.3086
2015-16 Swan Valley Stampeders MJHL 60 17 24 41 0.683 0.1933 0.1792 0.4305 0.3991
■ 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
2016-17 Wisconsin-Stout D3 BigTen FR 27 8 12 20 0.741
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.74
2016-17 · Wisconsin-Stout
+431.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#28099
Forward overall
#1149
Forward born in 1995
#943
in MJHL

D1 Comparables

Bob Kinne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bradley Duwe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Clint Carlisle
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.78 PPG
→ Army (0.52 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Thomas Dunn
Fredonia · 2015-16
0.429 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Derek Britner
UMass Dartmouth · 2017-18
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Travis Quigley
Southern New Hampshire · 2017-18
0.333 Developing
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.