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

Gabriel Laflamme Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2003-01-01 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
2023-24 Portage Terriers MJHL 58 18 32 50 0.862 0.2439 0.2222 0.5432 0.4949
■ 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 SUNY Geneseo D3 — SO 24 1 7 8 0.333
2024-25 SUNY Geneseo D3 — FR 26 4 10 14 0.538
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.54
2024-25 · SUNY Geneseo
+183.1% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

12%
NCAA D1
22%
NCAA D2/D3
65%
Age-Out / Club
0%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#15227
Forward overall
#575
Forward born in 2003
#294
in MJHL

D1 Comparables

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
Ricky DeRosa
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
Perry D'Arrisso
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.02 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Vinny Post
Adrian · 2015-16
0.714 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Max Bobrow
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2009-10
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
John Grealish
UMass Dartmouth · 2018-19
0.600 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.