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

Sean Malone Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-04-30 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
2012-13 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 50 16 17 33 0.660 0.5250 0.5118 2.4718 2.4098
■ 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
2016-17 Harvard D1 ECAC SR 36 18 24 42 1.167
2015-16 Harvard D1 ECAC JR 27 10 9 19 0.704
2014-15 Harvard D1 ECAC SO 21 8 10 18 0.857
2013-14 Harvard D1 ECAC FR 31 6 14 20 0.645
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.48
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.65
2013-14 · Harvard
+35.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2081
Forward overall
#76
Forward born in 1995

D1 Comparables

Gabe Guertler
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.85 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.57 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Weis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Motte
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Michigan (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG
Scott Conway
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Penn State (0.76 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Strong
NCAAe PPG
John Hayden
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Yale (0.48 D1 FR PPG)
0.49 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nick Ford
Elmira · 2014-15
0.800 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Joseph Fiorino
Southern New Hampshire · 2016-17
0.593 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jason Kalinowski
Endicott · 2015-16
1.310 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.