← New Search ↗ Social Card

Ethan Scardina Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2000-11-02 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
2016-17 Vernon Vipers BCHL 1 0 0 0 0.000
2017-18 Cowichan Valley Capitals BCHL 48 14 12 26 0.542 0.2108 0.2321 0.7900 0.8700
2018-19 Nanaimo Clippers BCHL 54 26 30 56 1.037 0.4036 0.4227 1.5123 1.5838
2019-20 Nanaimo Clippers BCHL 50 22 25 47 0.940 0.3658 0.3658 1.3708 1.3708
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 Bowling Green D1 CCHA GR 35 7 9 16 0.457
2023-24 Bowling Green D1 CCHA SR 26 6 6 12 0.462
2022-23 Bowling Green D1 CCHA JR 31 11 5 16 0.516
2021-22 Bowling Green D1 CCHA SO 27 5 4 9 0.333
2020-21 Bowling Green D1 WCHA FR 24 1 4 5 0.208
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.30
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.21
2020-21 · Bowling Green
-29.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

62%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
38%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#7857
Forward overall
#185
Forward born in 2000
#513
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.69 PPG
→ Michigan (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.45 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.98 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.90 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Elite
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.09 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

St. Thomas · 2014-15
0.923 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Utica · 2016-17
0.864 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Manhattanville · 2007-08
1.231 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.