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

Nick Schmaltz Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-02-23 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 — USHL 11 1 3 4 0.364 0.2315 0.2642 1.0896 1.2435
2012-13 — USHL 64 18 34 52 0.812 0.5174 0.5630 2.4348 2.6492
2013-14 — USHL 55 18 45 63 1.145 0.7295 0.7596 3.4327 3.5745
■ 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
2015-16 North Dakota D1 NCHC SO 37 11 35 46 1.243
2014-15 North Dakota D1 NCHC FR 38 5 21 26 0.684
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.63
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.68
2014-15 · North Dakota
+7.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1940
Forward overall
#68
Forward born in 1996
#248
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Anthony Louis
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Miami (0.69 D1 FR PPG)
0.69 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Trevor Moore
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.02 PPG
→ Denver (0.76 D1 FR PPG)
0.67 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Kelleher
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.67 Average
NCAAe PPG
Zach Diamantoni
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.66 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Brendan Harms
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.09 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.55 D1 FR PPG)
0.72 Strong
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.