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

Matt Davis Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1982-12-17 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
2001-02 Omaha Lancers USHL 51 8 5 13 0.255 0.1504 0.1516 0.7656 0.7718
■ 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
2005-06 Miami D1 NCHC SR 39 17 8 25 0.641
2004-05 Miami D1 NCHC JR 34 5 6 11 0.324
2003-04 Buffalo State D3 SUNYAC SO 8 1 0 1 0.125
2003-04 Miami D1 NCHC SO 41 6 5 11 0.268
2002-03 Buffalo State D3 SUNYAC FR 3 0 1 1 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2002-03 · Buffalo State
+156.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#35614
Forward overall
#888
Forward born in 1982
#3228
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Canon Pieper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sebastian Weberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Colgate
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Austin Vieth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Hynes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Union (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tim Lappin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Brown (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Steve Gervais
Neumann · 2007-08
0.625 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Dillon Henningson
Manhattanville · 2004-05
0.765 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Bo Webster
Hobart · 2011-12
0.577 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.