← New Search ↗ Social Card

Cody Gudnason Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2003-08-11 Country: Canada
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
2019-20 Neepawa Titans MJHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2020-21 Neepawa Titans MJHL 7 0 1 1 0.143 0.0275 0.0275 0.0903 0.0903
2021-22 Neepawa Titans MJHL 53 9 10 19 0.358 0.0690 0.0718 0.2265 0.2357
2022-23 Neepawa Titans MJHL 49 9 12 21 0.429 0.0825 0.0820 0.2708 0.2691
2023-24 Neepawa Titans MJHL 45 13 24 37 0.822 0.1583 0.1490 0.5195 0.4891
■ 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
2025-26 Niagara ACHA_D1 AHA — 23 5 11 16 0.696
2024-25 Niagara ACHA_D1 AHA — 23 5 11 16 0.696
2023-24 Niagara ACHA_D1 AHA — 23 5 11 16 0.696
2022-23 Niagara ACHA_D1 AHA — 23 5 11 16 0.696
2021-22 Niagara ACHA_D1 AHA — 23 5 11 16 0.696
2020-21 Niagara ACHA_D1 AHA — 23 5 11 16 0.696

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

25%
NCAA D1
20%
NCAA D2/D3
48%
Age-Out / Club
8%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#35360
Forward overall
#2161
Forward born in 2003
#644
in MJHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Babson · 2016-17
0.556 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Endicott · 2016-17
0.714 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Marian · 2023-24
0.667 Strong
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.