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

Alex Morton Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1987-09-19 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
2005-06 Notre Dame Hounds SJHL 19 2 4 6 0.316 0.0912 0.0964 0.2377 0.2513
2006-07 Notre Dame Hounds SJHL 57 22 24 46 0.807 0.2331 0.2341 0.6075 0.6101
■ 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
2010-11 Fredonia D3 — SR 26 10 15 25 0.962
2009-10 Fredonia D3 — JR 26 15 21 36 1.385
2008-09 Fredonia D3 — SO 24 5 10 15 0.625
2007-08 Fredonia D3 — FR 25 4 8 12 0.480
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2007-08 · Fredonia
+213.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#23686
Forward overall
#913
Forward born in 1987
#767
in SJHL

D1 Comparables

Zach Szajner
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Landon Smith
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.79 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Erik Baskin
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ Air Force (0.66 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Strong
NCAAe PPG
C.J. Reuschlein
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ Army (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jake Wood
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ RPI (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brad Michalchuk
Middlebury · 2000-01
0.556 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Maxwell Reavis
UMass Boston · 2010-11
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Malcolm Arseneau
Fredonia · 2017-18
0.818 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.