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

Matt Pohlkamp Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-06-12 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 Fargo Force USHL 30 4 6 10 0.333 0.2122 0.2022 0.9988 0.9519
■ 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 Bowling Green D1 WCHA SR 40 13 10 23 0.575
2015-16 Bowling Green D1 WCHA JR 42 8 16 24 0.571
2014-15 Bowling Green D1 WCHA SO 39 8 17 25 0.641
2013-14 Bowling Green D1 WCHA FR 39 9 7 16 0.410
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.41
2013-14 · Bowling Green
+137.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#15246
Forward overall
#566
Forward born in 1993
#2295
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Robin Höglund
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chris Berry
Wisconsin-Superior · 2004-05
1.111 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Travis Quigley
Southern New Hampshire · 2016-17
0.333 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Galati
SUNY Oswego · 2011-12
1.241 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.