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

Mario Ferraro Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1998-09-17 Country: Canada
2017 · Round 2, Pick #49  ·  San Jose Sharks San Jose Sharks
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
2014-15 — OJHL 43 1 11 12 0.279 0.0684 0.0773 0.1922 0.2171
2015-16 — OJHL 51 6 34 40 0.784 0.1922 0.2064 0.5400 0.5800
2016-17 — USHL 60 8 33 41 0.683 0.4031 0.4123 2.0522 2.0992
■ 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 UMass D1 HockeyEast SO 41 2 12 14 0.342
2017-18 UMass D1 HockeyEast FR 39 4 19 23 0.590
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.31
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.59
2017-18 · UMass
+89.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Michael Kapla
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.49 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Will Butcher
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Denver (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Dan Renouf
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.49 PPG
→ Maine (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Ian Brady
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.53 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.64 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Gavin Bayreuther
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.95 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Ryan Cusin
UMass Boston · 2013-14
1.600 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Stevens
Plymouth State · 2012-13
1.444 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Christopher Miraldo
Westfield State · 2021-22
1.037 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.