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

Samuel Stitz Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2003-06-18 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
2021-22 Thunder Hockey Club NCDC 47 15 21 36 0.766 0.4271 0.4467 0.6194 0.6478
2022-23 Maryland Black Bears NAHL 51 11 26 37 0.726 0.2874 0.2875 0.7617 0.7619
2023-24 Maryland Black Bears NAHL 27 12 19 31 1.148 0.4549 0.4333 1.2054 1.1481
■ 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
2025-26 Air Force D1 AHA — 34 11 21 32 0.941
2024-25 Air Force D1 AHA — 39 8 8 16 0.410
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.32
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.41
2024-25 · Air Force
+27.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

35%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
45%
Age-Out / Club
20%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#9023
Forward overall
#382
Forward born in 2003

D1 Comparables

Brandon Wahlin
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.33 PPG
→ UMass (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Michael Huntebrinker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.51 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Todd Skirving
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ RIT (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Eric Scheid
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.94 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tim Bonner
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.89 PPG
→ Yale
0.50 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Anders Grongstad
Worcester State · 2021-22
0.808 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
David Italiano
Williams · 2013-14
0.880 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Brady Fleurent
New England · 2014-15
1.074 Elite
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.