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

Carl Hagelin Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-08-23 Country: Sweden
2007 · Round 6, Pick #168  ·  New York Rangers New York Rangers
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
2005-06 Södertälje SK U20 SuperElit 41 20 20 40 0.976 0.3850 0.4083 1.3250 1.4052
2006-07 Södertälje SK U20 SuperElit 40 24 31 55 1.375 0.5426 0.5487 1.8674 1.8884
■ 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
2010-11 Michigan D1 CCHA-orig SR 44 18 31 49 1.114
2009-10 Michigan D1 BigTen JR 45 19 31 50 1.111
2008-09 Michigan D1 BigTen SO 41 13 18 31 0.756
2007-08 Michigan D1 BigTen FR 41 11 11 22 0.537
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.42
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.54
2007-08 · Michigan
+27.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3556
Forward overall
#158
Forward born in 1988

D1 Comparables

Luke Johnson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.81 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alex Kile
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.07 PPG
→ Michigan (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.64 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Austin Cangelosi
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.14 PPG
→ Boston College (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Tony Calderone
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.69 PPG
→ Michigan (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Brendan Harms
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.09 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.55 D1 FR PPG)
0.66 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Zach Tarantino
UMass Dartmouth · 2017-18
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Donny Flynn
Wilkes · 2015-16
1.423 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Woodward
SUNY Oswego · 2000-01
1.226 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.