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

Mike Matheson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1994-02-27 Country: Canada
2012 · Round 1, Pick #23  ·  Florida Panthers Florida Panthers
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
2011-12 — USHL 53 11 16 27 0.509 0.3005 0.3131 1.5299 1.5939
■ 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
2014-15 Boston College D1 HockeyEast — 38 3 22 25 0.658
2013-14 Boston College D1 HockeyEast — 38 3 18 21 0.553
2012-13 Boston College D1 HockeyEast — 36 8 17 25 0.694
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.30
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.69
2012-13 · Boston College
+134.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2977
Defenseman overall
#607
Defenseman born in 1994
#1441
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Clark Kuster
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ St. Cloud State
0.29 No data
NCAAe PPG
Luke Voltin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Will Butcher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Denver (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jack Stander
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Canisius (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Roy
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.30 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chris Atkinson
Curry · 2005-06
0.962 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
James Tatro
Salem State · 2021-22
1.269 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Dom Murphy
University of New England · 2021-22
0.826 Strong
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.