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

Kevin Lassman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2000-03-07 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
2018-19 Connecticut Jr. Rangers NCDC 41 2 9 11 0.268 0.1094 0.1124 0.2157 0.2216
2019-20 — NCDC 48 1 15 16 0.333 0.1359 0.1359 0.2679 0.2679
■ 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
2023-24 Hobart D3 SUNYAC SR 24 1 7 8 0.333
2022-23 Hobart D3 SUNYAC JR 30 1 9 10 0.333
2021-22 Hobart D3 SUNYAC SO 20 2 5 7 0.350
2020-21 Hobart D3 SUNYAC FR 0 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

10%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
78%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#7637
Defenseman overall
#1519
Defenseman born in 2000
#1089
in NCDC

D1 Comparables

Tim Davison
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Zach Frye
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.19 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Garret Cockerill
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Justin Wade
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.10 No data
NCAAe PPG
Dane Cooper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Brown (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Paul Vella
Skidmore · 2014-15
0.478 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Pacheco
Post · 2021-22
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Hartviksen
Wisconsin-Stout · 2006-07
0.474 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.