← New Search ↗ Social Card

Matt Basgall Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2002-08-16 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
2018-19 Omaha Lancers USHL 5 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 Omaha Lancers USHL 46 2 8 10 0.217 0.1336 0.1336 0.6405 0.6405
2020-21 Omaha Lancers USHL 38 1 10 11 0.289 0.1780 0.1780 0.8529 0.8529
2021-22 USHL 57 9 37 46 0.807 0.4961 0.4796 2.3776 2.2983
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 Michigan D1 BigTen 37 4 16 20 0.540
2025-26 Michigan State D1 BigTen SR 37 4 16 20 0.540
2024-25 Michigan D1 BigTen JR 37 6 20 26 0.703
2023-24 Michigan D1 BigTen SO 38 1 15 16 0.421
2022-23 Michigan D1 BigTen FR 38 4 13 17 0.447
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.45
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.45
2022-23 · Michigan
-1.2% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

80%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
5%
Age-Out / Club
10%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#2833
Defenseman overall
#730
Defenseman born in 2002
#1458
in USHL

D1 Comparables

WHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Hamline (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Providence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Average D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.95 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Wilkes · 2016-17
1.423 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Wilkes · 2016-17
1.385 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Utica · 2017-18
1.448 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.