← New Search ↗ Social Card

Nick Chiappetta Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1990-01-09 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
2006-07 Bramalea Blues OJHL 3 0 0 0 0.000
2007-08 Streetsville Derbys (OLD) OJHL 46 3 12 15 0.326 0.0799 0.0833 0.2245 0.2340
2008-09 Streetsville Derbys (OLD) OJHL 27 5 16 21 0.778 0.1906 0.1889 0.5355 0.5306
2009-10 Villanova Knights OJHL 42 1 14 15 0.357 0.0875 0.0821 0.2459 0.2307
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
2011-12 Wentworth D3 CNE 0 0 0 0 0.000
2010-11 Wentworth D3 CNE 11 0 3 3 0.273
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.27
2010-11 · Wentworth
+131.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11312
Defenseman overall
#1368
Defenseman born in 1990
#2316
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.11 PPG
→ Southern Maine (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Average D
NCAAe PPG
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lawrence · 2009-10
0.926 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2023-24
0.421 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Connecticut College · 2016-17
0.364 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.