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

Cooper Marody Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-12-20 Country: USA
2015 · Round 6, Pick #158  ·  Philadelphia Flyers Philadelphia Flyers
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
2013-14 Muskegon Lumberjacks USHL 58 9 21 30 0.517 0.3051 0.3303 1.5534 1.6816
2014-15 — USHL 52 22 36 58 1.115 0.6580 0.6799 3.3500 3.4616
■ 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 JR 40 16 35 51 1.275
2016-17 Michigan D1 BigTen SO 18 5 10 15 0.833
2015-16 Michigan D1 BigTen FR 32 10 14 24 0.750
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.50
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.75
2015-16 · Michigan
+49.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Brendan Harms
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.09 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.55 D1 FR PPG)
0.66 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Kelleher
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.63 Average
NCAAe PPG
Zach Diamantoni
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.61 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Anthony Louis
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Miami (0.69 D1 FR PPG)
0.64 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Vinni Lettieri
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.92 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.56 Developing
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.