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

Chris Kotrides Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1996-02-09 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
2014-15 Philadelphia Flyers Elite USPHL-Premier-Classic 4 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2015-16 Syracuse Jr. Stars USPHL-Elite 9 1 1 2 0.222 0.0205 0.0200 0.0509 0.0496
2016-17 — EHL 24 0 1 1 0.042 0.0096 0.0091 0.0204 0.0192
■ 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 Buffalo State D3 SUNYAC — 0 0 0 0 0.000

NCAAe Rankings

#26321
Defenseman overall
#2840
Defenseman born in 1996

D1 Comparables

Carter Foguth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Michael Holland
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ RIT (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Shayne McLaughlin
Wisconsin-Stout · 2012-13
0.222 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Mazzarolo
Neumann · 2010-11
0.111 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Alex Elander Varrin
Western New England · 2024-25
0.067 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.