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

Matthew Wolf Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-01-18 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
2014-15 Rochester Jr. Americans USPHL-Premier-Classic 32 6 6 12 0.375 0.1126 0.1170 0.3089 0.3210
2015-16 Utica Jr. Comets USPHL-Premier-Classic 35 8 18 26 0.743 0.2231 0.2209 0.6119 0.6059
■ 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
2019-20 Skidmore D3 SUNYAC SR 14 2 2 4 0.286
2018-19 Skidmore D3 SUNYAC JR 23 3 6 9 0.391
2017-18 Skidmore D3 SUNYAC SO 15 2 3 5 0.333
2016-17 Skidmore D3 SUNYAC FR 26 5 6 11 0.423
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.42
2016-17 · Skidmore
+175.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#23254
Forward overall
#972
Forward born in 1996
#120
in USPHL-Premier-Classic

D1 Comparables

Evan Ritt
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Denver
0.24 No data
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Nick DeCenzo
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Army (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mark Kishko
Lebanon Valley · 2017-18
0.250 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Marc Harrie
Concordia · 2007-08
0.800 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Dean Balsamo
Adrian · 2015-16
0.688 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.