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 0.0963 0.0938 0.3638 0.3543
2014-15 Springfield Jr. Pics USPHL-Premier-Classic 48 8 7 15 0.312 0.0877 0.0835 0.2569 0.2446
■ 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 University of New England D3 CNE SO 23 10 11 21 0.913
2015-16 University of New England D3 CNE FR 25 12 6 18 0.720
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.07
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.72
2015-16 · University of New England
+860.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#49036
Forward overall
#2037
Forward born in 1994

D1 Comparables

Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

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