← New Search ↗ Social Card

Vito Aluia Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-02-23 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
2012-13 Port Huron Fighting Falcons NAHL 52 8 12 20 0.385 0.1413 0.1451 0.4059 0.4168
2013-14 Port Huron Fighting Falcons NAHL 58 13 20 33 0.569 0.2091 0.2042 0.6006 0.5866
2014-15 Keystone Ice Miners NAHL 54 6 10 16 0.296 0.1089 0.1007 0.3127 0.2890
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 Lake Forest D1 NCHA SR 8 0 2 2 0.250
2018-19 Lake Forest D3 NCHA SR 8 0 2 2 0.250
2017-18 Lake Forest D3 NCHA JR 15 2 2 4 0.267
2016-17 Lake Forest D3 NCHA SO 21 2 5 7 0.333
2015-16 Lake Forest D3 NCHA FR 24 6 1 7 0.292
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.29
2015-16 · Lake Forest
+139.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#34684
Forward overall
#1357
Forward born in 1994
#3435
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lawrence · 2015-16
0.471 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Saint Anselm · 2024-25
0.571 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
University of New England · 2024-25
0.000 No data
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.