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

Anthony Libonati Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1986-12-07 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
2005-06 Blind River Beavers NOJHL 47 16 17 33 0.702 0.1184 0.1194 0.2917 0.2942
2006-07 Blind River Beavers NOJHL 43 26 33 59 1.372 0.2313 0.2224 0.5701 0.5481
■ 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
2007-08 Becker D3 — FR 25 13 12 25 1.000
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.00
2007-08 · Becker
+544.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#22200
Forward overall
#867
Forward born in 1986
#121
in NOJHL

D1 Comparables

Ian Miller
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Evan Ritt
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Denver
0.24 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brendan Young
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2018-19
0.423 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
James Nash
Southern New Hampshire · 2018-19
0.652 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Patrick Gazich
Gustavus Adolphus · 2016-17
0.500 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.