← New Search ↗ Social Card

Anthony Forgione Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1982-11-06 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
2001-02 Tulsa Crude USHL 9 0 2 2 0.222 0.1366 0.1369 0.6546 0.6563
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
2005-06 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 SO 25 2 5 7 0.280
2004-05 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 FR 22 4 5 9 0.409
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.41
2004-05 · Wisconsin-Stevens Point
+249.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Union (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Colgate
0.14 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ RPI (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

SUNY Brockport · 2024-25
0.731 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Johnson & Wales · 2016-17
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Neumann · 2011-12
0.609 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.