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

Matthew Lison Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-06-21 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
2013-14 Lone Star Brahmas NAHL 58 19 14 33 0.569 0.2113 0.1992 0.6025 0.5681
■ 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
2017-18 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC SR 23 7 6 13 0.565
2016-17 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC JR 21 4 17 21 1.000
2015-16 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC SO 25 11 10 21 0.840
2014-15 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC FR 12 7 6 13 1.083
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.08
2014-15 · Bowdoin
+535.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#18807
Forward overall
#715
Forward born in 1993
#1683
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Cody Marooney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bob Kinne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jayson Angus
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Clint Carlisle
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.78 PPG
→ Army (0.52 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Dom Kuziak
Castleton · 2016-17
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brent Cooper
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2003-04
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
David Ripple
SUNY Geneseo · 2011-12
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.