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

Mike Iwanski Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1989-05-15 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
2006-07 Streetsville Derbys (OLD) OJHL 47 17 26 43 0.915 0.2242 0.2364 0.6299 0.6643
2007-08 — OJHL 42 10 21 31 0.738 0.1809 0.1826 0.5082 0.5130
■ 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
2008-09 Hamilton D3 NESCAC FR 9 0 4 4 0.444
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.44
2008-09 · Hamilton
+154.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#22320
Forward overall
#748
Forward born in 1989
#951
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Josh Nenadal
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.30 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Pham
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Army (0.91 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Gage Torrel
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG
Jason Ford
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Adam Johnson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.46 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Griffen Sanom
Lake Forest · 2018-19
0.769 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Landon Brownlee
Middlebury · 2022-23
0.423 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Mike Moher
Amherst · 2003-04
0.500 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.