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

Ian Krutchensky Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2001-04-30 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
2020-21 Brooklyn Aviators USPHL-Premier 30 1 10 11 0.367 0.0494 0.0494 0.1248 0.1248
2021-22 Connecticut Nor'Easter EHL 22 2 6 8 0.364 0.0780 0.0751 0.1781 0.1716
■ 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
2022-23 Concordia D3 MIAC — 6 0 0 0 0.000
2022-23 Concordia Wisconsin D3 NCHA FR 6 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

40%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#13211
Defenseman overall
#1797
Defenseman born in 2001
#2028
in USPHL-Premier

D1 Comparables

Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Drew Brevig
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Wade Harstad
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2003-04
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Shawn Overton
St. Norbert · 2006-07
0.231 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Bob Marx
Saint Mary's · 2010-11
0.318 Developing
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.