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

Matt Fusco

Position: Defense DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin Country: ?
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
2018-19 Dexter NE-Prep 30 1 4 5 0.167 0.0470 0.0470 0.0763 0.0763
2019-20 Dexter NE-Prep 30 9 16 25 0.833 0.2351 0.2351 0.3813 0.3813
2021-22 Dexter NE-Prep 25 3 7 10 0.400 0.1128 0.1128 0.1830 0.1830
■ 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 Dartmouth D1 ECAC JR 32 4 2 6 0.188
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.19
2025-26 · Dartmouth
+22.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

8%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
57%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#12092
Defenseman overall
#678
in NE-Prep

D1 Comparables

Kyle Mackey
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Air Force (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Zach Yoder
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.10 PPG
→ Air Force (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Ruslan Pedan
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jake Bischoff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Lukas Buchta
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.05 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.03 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jimmy Cusan
Lake Forest · 2012-13
0.333 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Brett Zeggil
Castleton · 2006-07
0.316 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Victor Bergström
Plymouth State · 2013-14
0.471 Average
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.