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

Michael Schumacher Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1999-02-15 Country: USA
2011 · Round 7, Pick #200  ·  Los Angeles Kings Los Angeles Kings
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
2017-18 Madison Capitols USHL 56 0 9 9 0.161 0.0948 0.0942 0.4826 0.4797
■ 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 St. Lawrence D1 ECAC FR 18 0 2 2 0.111
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.09
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.11
2018-19 · St. Lawrence
+25.0% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

30%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
65%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#17307
Defenseman overall
#2745
Defenseman born in 1999
#3835
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Sam Piazza
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Michigan (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Niklas Folin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Garret Cockerill
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Tim Davison
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Zach Frye
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.19 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Toby Sengvongxay
Gustavus Adolphus · 2015-16
0.480 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Regen Cavanagh
Utica · 2015-16
0.778 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jack Johnson
Saint John's · 2016-17
0.957 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.