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

Tony Calderone Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-10-15 Country: USA
Signed Professionally

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
2012-13 Sioux Falls Stampede USHL 64 29 15 44 0.688 0.4378 0.4466 2.0602 2.1017
2013-14 Sioux Falls Stampede USHL 60 24 17 41 0.683 0.4351 0.4235 2.0476 1.9931
■ 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 Michigan D1 BigTen SR 40 25 20 45 1.125
2016-17 Michigan D1 BigTen JR 31 15 3 18 0.581
2015-16 Michigan D1 BigTen SO 35 11 9 20 0.571
2014-15 Michigan D1 BigTen FR 28 3 6 9 0.321
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.37
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.32
2014-15 · Michigan
-13.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Judd Peterson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Villiam Haag
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Average
NCAAe PPG
Grant Opperman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.56 PPG
→ Dartmouth (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Trevor Olson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.49 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Thomas Forgione
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.70 PPG
→ Vermont (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Logan DiScanio
New England · 2017-18
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Justin Fox
Salem State · 2005-06
1.429 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2002-03
1.800 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.