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

Matthew Vander Vort Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2005-01-21 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
2022-23 Houston Bulls NAHL 11 0 2 2 0.182 0.0668 0.0721 1.5017 1.5564
■ 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 Amherst D3 NESCAC JR 23 3 6 9 0.391
2024-25 Amherst D3 NESCAC SO 24 3 2 5 0.208
2023-24 Amherst D3 NESCAC FR 21 2 8 10 0.476
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2023-24 · Amherst
+671.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

10%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
15%
Age-Out / Club
70%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#52706
Forward overall
#3641
Forward born in 2005

D1 Comparables

Jason Cotton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.13 PPG
→ Northeastern
0.08 No data
NCAAe PPG
Bryan Basilico
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.07 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Eastman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.19 PPG
→ Robert Morris (0.09 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Félix Caron
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ RPI (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Bo Pieper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.19 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

James Tatro
Salem State · 2021-22
1.269 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Maxwell Donohoe
Neumann · 2021-22
1.500 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brett Gravelle
St. Thomas · 2014-15
0.923 Strong
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.