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

Matthew Weis Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-05-23 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
2011-12 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 33 6 9 15 0.455 0.2894 0.3193 1.3620 1.5029
2012-13 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 56 13 27 40 0.714 0.4549 0.4778 2.1405 2.2481
2013-14 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 52 23 34 57 1.096 0.6981 0.7005 3.2850 3.2965
■ 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
2017-18 Ohio State D1 BigTen SR 37 12 25 37 1.000
2016-17 Ohio State D1 BigTen JR 32 9 22 31 0.969
2015-16 Ohio State D1 BigTen SO 34 11 21 32 0.941
2014-15 Ohio State D1 BigTen FR 33 8 14 22 0.667
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.57
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.67
2014-15 · Ohio State
+17.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2281
Forward overall
#85
Forward born in 1995
#312
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Nick Schilkey
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.70 D1 FR PPG)
0.77 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Alex Kile
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.07 PPG
→ Michigan (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.69 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Dennis Kravchenko
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ UMass (0.92 D1 FR PPG)
0.70 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Sheldon Dries
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.58 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Peter Quenneville
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.80 D1 FR PPG)
0.70 Elite
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Filimon Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 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.