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

Matthew Frydrysek Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1989-05-22 Country: Canada
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
2007-08 Alberni Valley Bulldogs BCHL 58 7 10 17 0.293 0.1129 0.1152 0.4265 0.4350
2008-09 — BCHL 34 3 0 3 0.088 0.0340 0.0333 0.1284 0.1256
2009-10 Trenton Golden Hawks OJHL 11 5 8 13 1.182 0.2897 0.2626 0.8137 0.7377
■ 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
2010-11 Westfield State D3 MASCAC — 14 0 2 2 0.143
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.14
2010-11 · Westfield State
-2.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#28954
Forward overall
#955
Forward born in 1989

D1 Comparables

Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Justin Parizek
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
T.J. Sarcona
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.06 PPG
→ Niagara (0.58 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Vadim Vasjonkin
Buffalo State · 2016-17
0.889 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nathan Garnier
SUNY Cortland · 2023-24
0.696 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nick Melligan
Buffalo State · 2010-11
0.636 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.