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

Dustin Laren Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-02-01 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 Stouffville Spirit OJHL 4 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2007-08 Stouffville Spirit OJHL 43 14 20 34 0.791 0.1938 0.2026 0.5444 0.5690
2008-09 Stouffville Spirit OJHL 44 12 27 39 0.886 0.2173 0.2160 0.6103 0.6066
■ 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
2009-10 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC FR 20 0 2 2 0.100
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.10
2009-10 · Connecticut College
-44.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#20967
Forward overall
#817
Forward born in 1990
#844
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Mason Jobst
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.86 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Jeff Kubiak
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Cornell (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Blake Winiecki
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Seth Adams
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Mackenzie MacEachern
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.42 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jack Johansen
Fitchburg State · 2018-19
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew Lay
Lawrence · 2010-11
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Leo Stolpe
Plymouth State · 2015-16
0.870 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.