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

Anton Näsström Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-10-06 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
2017-18 MoDo Hockey U20 SuperElit 27 7 3 10 0.370 0.1462 0.1485 0.5030 0.5109
■ 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 Plymouth State D3 LittleEast — 20 7 12 19 0.950
2020-21 Plymouth State D3 LittleEast — 6 4 0 4 0.667
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.67
2020-21 · Plymouth State
+424.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

12%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
88%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#31444
Forward overall
#1683
Forward born in 1999

D1 Comparables

Ryan Fitzgerald
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.12 PPG
→ Boston College (0.72 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Ian Mansfield
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Army (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cédric Lacroix
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.13 PPG
→ Maine (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Thomas Ebbing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Gaudreau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Boston College (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Adam Valadao
Curry · 2011-12
0.727 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Matthew Esposito
SUNY Cortland · 2010-11
0.769 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Matthew Headland
Canton · 2016-17
0.682 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.