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

Mason Marcellus Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2002-07-19 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
2020-21 Drayton Valley Thunder AJHL 16 6 16 22 1.375 0.4612 0.4612 1.2724 1.2724
2021-22 Lincoln Stars USHL 62 10 36 46 0.742 0.4376 0.4213 2.2282 2.1455
2022-23 Lincoln Stars USHL 58 19 49 68 1.172 0.6916 0.6299 3.5212 3.2073
■ 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
2025-26 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC JR 38 8 26 34 0.895
2024-25 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC SR 38 10 28 38 1.000
2023-24 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC JR 39 14 22 36 0.923
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.51
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.92
2023-24 · Quinnipiac
+81.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

92%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
8%
Age-Out / Club
0%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#4365
Forward overall
#167
Forward born in 2002

D1 Comparables

Mike Szmatula
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.21 PPG
→ Northeastern (1.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.65 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Michael Huntebrinker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.49 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tim Bonner
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.89 PPG
→ Yale
0.48 No data
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Novak
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.65 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eric Scheid
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.94 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Osmundson
Utica · 2018-19
1.448 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.