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

Brandon Fortunato Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1996-06-07 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 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 56 0 21 21 0.375 0.2908 0.2996 1.3957 1.4379
2013-14 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 61 3 34 37 0.607 0.4704 0.4588 2.2577 2.2022
■ 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
2018-19 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC SR 26 5 23 28 1.077
2017-18 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC JR 37 5 3 8 0.216
2015-16 Boston University D1 HockeyEast — 38 5 17 22 0.579
2014-15 Boston University D1 HockeyEast — 41 1 17 18 0.439
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.37
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.44
2014-15 · Boston University
+17.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Matt Nuttle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Cornell
0.43 No data
NCAAe PPG
Michael Brodzinski
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.54 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Ian McCoshen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.83 PPG
→ Boston College (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.54 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Gross
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Neal Pionk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Sam Anderson
Albertus Magnus · 2017-18
0.720 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Lucas Signoretti
Buffalo State · 2022-23
1.120 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Reifler
Elmira · 2016-17
1.067 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.