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

Matthew Esposito Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-09-16 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
2009-10 Chicago Steel USHL 25 2 5 7 0.280 0.1783 0.1902 0.8391 0.8950
2010-11 Lincoln Stars USHL 3 0 2 2 0.667 0.4246 0.4315 1.9979 2.0301
2011-12 — BCHL 15 1 2 3 0.200 0.0778 0.0768 0.2917 0.2881
■ 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
2013-14 SUNY Cortland D3 — FR 13 6 4 10 0.769
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.77
2013-14 · SUNY Cortland
+310.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#33716
Forward overall
#1416
Forward born in 1992

D1 Comparables

Conor Andrle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Army (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Average
NCAAe PPG
Conor Lemirande
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Miami (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Erik Baskin
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ Air Force (0.66 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Zach Szajner
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Hynes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Union (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Cory Harder
St. Norbert · 2005-06
0.438 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tanner Opie
UMass Dartmouth · 2017-18
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Murray
Daniel Webster · 2012-13
0.389 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.