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

Camron Lowe Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-11-05 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
2022-23 Utica Jr. Comets NCDC 49 0 8 8 0.163 0.0377 0.0386 0.1320 0.1350
2023-24 Utica Jr. Comets NCDC 52 5 19 24 0.462 0.1067 0.1031 0.3732 0.3607
■ 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
2025-26 Elmira D3 UCHC — 25 2 11 13 0.520
2024-25 Elmira D3 UCHC — 25 2 13 15 0.600
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.07
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.60
2024-25 · Elmira
+721.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

25%
NCAA D2/D3
8%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#7338
Defenseman overall
#1735
Defenseman born in 2003
#1006
in NCDC

D1 Comparables

Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG
Kyle McKenzie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jack Bartfield
Skidmore · 2024-25
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
T.J. Theodosopoulos
Wisconsin-Superior · 2014-15
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
David DuBord
St. Thomas · 2000-01
0.679 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.