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

Sam Lipkin Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2003-01-03 Country: USA
2021 NHL Draft Round 7, Pick #223  ·  Utah Mammoth Utah Mammoth (via ARI)
Signed Professionally

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
2019-20 — USHL 4 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2020-21 — USHL 30 3 8 11 0.367 0.2254 0.2254 1.0804 1.0804
2021-22 — USHL 59 36 35 71 1.203 0.7397 0.7292 3.5455 3.4954
■ 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
2023-24 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC — 39 15 20 35 0.897
2022-23 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC — 39 14 29 43 1.103
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.68
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.10
2022-23 · Quinnipiac
+62.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

95%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
5%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Zach Stepan
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.39 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.84 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Peter Quenneville
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.80 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Toninato
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.09 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.67 Average
NCAAe PPG
Dennis Kravchenko
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ UMass (0.92 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Frank Vatrano
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ UMass
0.61 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Filimon Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 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.