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

Adam Kusior Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1998-12-18 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
2018-19 Vermont Lumberjacks EHL 43 12 21 33 0.767 0.1773 0.1739 0.3755 0.3682
■ 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
2021-22 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC — 24 2 3 5 0.208
2019-20 Fitchburg State D1 MASCAC FR 23 2 5 7 0.304
2019-20 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC — 23 2 5 7 0.304
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.30
2019-20 · Fitchburg State
+104.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

22%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
15%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#19418
Forward overall
#922
Forward born in 1998
#395
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mason Palmer
Augsburg · 2018-19
0.759 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Chris Berenguer
Hamline · 2005-06
0.944 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew White
Franklin Pierce · 2024-25
0.000 No data
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.