← New Search ↗ Social Card

Toivo Kramer Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2000-09-26 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 Jersey Hitmen USPHL-Premier 44 7 7 14 0.318 0.0416 0.0436 0.1080 0.1133
2019-20 New York Apple Core EHL 42 14 35 49 1.167 0.2695 0.2695 0.5709 0.5709
2020-21 Connecticut Nor'Easter EHL 21 8 10 18 0.857 0.1980 0.1980 0.4194 0.4194
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
2024-25 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC SR 23 4 4 8 0.348
2023-24 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC JR 27 6 14 20 0.741
2022-23 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC SO 25 5 8 13 0.520
2021-22 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC FR 22 7 8 15 0.682
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.04
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.68
2021-22 · Fitchburg State
+1727.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

0%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
95%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#19010
Forward overall
#858
Forward born in 2000

D1 Comparables

NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.12 PPG
→ Boston College (0.72 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.13 PPG
→ Maine (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Army (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.19 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Wilkes · 2022-23
0.174 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Stonehill · 2014-15
0.227 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Wentworth · 2010-11
0.429 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.