← New Search ↗ Social Card

Michael DeAngelo Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-11-19 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
2020-21 NTDP-U18 8 1 4 5 0.625 0.4646 0.4646 2.3321 2.3321
2021-22 Dubuque Fighting Saints USHL 38 3 3 6 0.158 0.0931 0.1005 0.4742 0.5120
2022-23 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 52 11 24 35 0.673 0.3971 0.4081 2.0216 2.0778
2023-24 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 58 23 29 52 0.897 0.5289 0.5173 2.6928 2.6338
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
2024-25 Michigan D1 BigTen 33 3 6 9 0.273
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.41
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.27
2024-25 · Michigan
-32.7% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

98%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Age-Out / Club
0%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#9045
Forward overall
#346
Forward born in 2004

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Boston University (0.77 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.82 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Buffalo State · 2023-24
1.120 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Elmira · 2017-18
1.067 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Fitchburg State · 2016-17
1.429 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.