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

Eric Nilson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2007-05-11 Country: Sweden
2025 NHL Draft Round 2, Pick #45  ·  Anaheim Ducks Anaheim Ducks
Signed Professionally
Allsvenskan

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
2023-24 — SuperElit 29 6 9 15 0.517 0.2026 0.2223 0.6353 0.6971
2024-25 — SuperElit 37 12 26 38 1.027 0.4024 0.4213 1.2615 1.3206
■ 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 Michigan D1 BigTen — 35 3 8 11 0.314
2025-26 Michigan State D1 BigTen FR 35 3 8 11 0.314
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.29
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.31
2025-26 · Michigan
+7.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

32%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
12%
Age-Out / Club
52%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#6853
Forward overall
#138
Forward born in 2007

D1 Comparables

Matthew Weis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Sean Malone
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Harvard (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Frederik Tiffels
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.66 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Mike Marnell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.49 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Motte
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Michigan (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nate Pionk
St. Scholastica · 2014-15
0.615 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Sam Ciappa
St. John Fisher · 2022-23
0.913 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nicholas Petriello
Buffalo State · 2004-05
1.200 Elite
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.