← New Search ↗ Social Card

Matt Denman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1998-04-20 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
2014-15 Prior Lake High USHS-MN 25 4 25 29 1.160 0.1469 0.1478 0.2818 0.2835
2015-16 Minnesota Magicians NAHL 14 0 5 5 0.357 0.1312 0.1427 0.3769 0.4099
2016-17 Minnesota Magicians NAHL 49 4 16 20 0.408 0.1500 0.1550 0.4309 0.4453
2017-18 Cedar Rapids RoughRiders USHL 40 4 26 30 0.750 0.4424 0.4215 2.2526 2.1461
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
2021-22 Minnesota D1 BigTen 2 0 0 0 0.000
2020-21 Minnesota D1 BigTen 1 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 Minnesota D1 BigTen 0 0 0 0 0.000
2018-19 Minnesota D1 BigTen FR 14 0 2 2 0.143
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.30
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.14
2018-19 · Minnesota
-51.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

72%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
10%
Age-Out / Club
15%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#2394
Defenseman overall
#547
Defenseman born in 1998

D1 Comparables

OHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Cornell (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Harvard (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Providence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

UMass Boston · 2015-16
1.125 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Oswego · 2003-04
1.704 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
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.