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

Nick Albano Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1996-08-01 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
2015-16 Portland Jr. Pirates USPHL-Premier-Classic 39 8 19 27 0.692 0.2079 0.2114 0.5702 0.5799
2016-17 Des Moines Buccaneers USHL 22 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
■ 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
2019-20 UMass Boston D3 HockeyEast JR 25 7 21 28 1.120
2018-19 UMass Boston D3 HockeyEast SO 27 6 16 22 0.815
2017-18 UMass Boston D3 HockeyEast FR 27 8 27 35 1.296
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.30
2017-18 · UMass Boston
+518.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11347
Defenseman overall
#1638
Defenseman born in 1996

D1 Comparables

Tommy Davis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Princeton (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Christian Neumann
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ UConn (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Mike McKee
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Nick Neville
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.58 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Tucker Poolman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mike Stevens
Southern Maine · 2004-05
0.963 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Gray
Connecticut College · 2006-07
0.609 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Mike Serba
Norwich · 2000-01
0.696 Strong
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.