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

Douglas Elgstam Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-12-29 Country: Sweden
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
2014-15 New Jersey Rockets EHL 12 5 8 13 1.083 0.2325 0.2388 0.5305 0.5448
2015-16 New Jersey Rockets EHL 35 28 26 54 1.543 0.3311 0.3255 0.7556 0.7427
■ 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
2019-20 SUNY Cortland D3 — SR 22 9 9 18 0.818
2018-19 SUNY Cortland D3 — JR 22 1 7 8 0.364
2017-18 SUNY Cortland D3 — SO 21 5 5 10 0.476
2016-17 SUNY Cortland D3 — FR 25 5 14 19 0.760
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.25
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.76
2016-17 · SUNY Cortland
+205.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11193
Forward overall
#393
Forward born in 1995
#34
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Siiro
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Princeton (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average
NCAAe PPG
Evan Ritt
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Denver
0.24 No data
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

George Thurston
Southern New Hampshire · 2017-18
0.909 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Anthony Ruberto
Hamilton · 2008-09
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Sean Farley
Utica · 2006-07
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.