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

Geoff Fortman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1993-02-14 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
2011-12 Amarillo Bulls NAHL 52 2 10 12 0.231 0.0857 0.0879 0.2444 0.2507
2012-13 Amarillo Bulls NAHL 56 7 21 28 0.500 0.1857 0.1812 0.5294 0.5165
■ 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
2016-17 Canisius D1 AHA SR 39 2 11 13 0.333
2015-16 Canisius D1 AHA JR 39 0 6 6 0.154
2014-15 Canisius D1 AHA SO 30 0 5 5 0.167
2013-14 Canisius D1 AHA FR 29 1 2 3 0.103
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.10
2013-14 · Canisius
-23.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7519
Defenseman overall
#1115
Defenseman born in 1993
#3357
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Max Everson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Harvard (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Nick Hinz
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Alaska
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Joseph Fiala
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Vinny Muto
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Niagara (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Parker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Matt McPherson
Concordia · 2018-19
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Logan Geisness
Concordia Wisconsin · 2018-19
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Kevin Leonard
Western New England · 2001-02
0.588 Average
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.