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

Armand Uomoleale Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-04-21 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
2013-14 Cowichan Valley Capitals BCHL 20 2 3 5 0.250 0.0973 0.0948 0.3646 0.3551
2014-15 Springfield Jr. Pics USPHL-Premier-Classic 48 8 7 15 0.312 0.0938 0.0893 0.2574 0.2450
■ 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
2016-17 New England D3 — SO 23 10 11 21 0.913
2015-16 New England D3 — FR 25 12 6 18 0.720
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.72
2015-16 · New England
+819.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#39315
Forward overall
#1628
Forward born in 1994

D1 Comparables

Bob Kinne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bradley Duwe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Cody Marooney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Blake O'Neill
Elmira · 2014-15
0.565 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kyle Star
St. Scholastica · 2015-16
0.391 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Ramm
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2023-24
0.588 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.