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

Matthew Van Blaricom Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2006-08-26 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
2022-23 Humboldt Broncos SJHL 33 13 12 25 0.758 0.2308 0.2658 0.5615 0.6466
2023-24 Humboldt Broncos SJHL 47 27 41 68 1.447 0.4407 0.4866 1.0722 1.1838
2024-25 Muskegon Lumberjacks USHL 60 9 10 19 0.317 0.1947 0.1977 0.9331 0.9474
■ 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 Michigan Tech D1 CCHA FR 28 2 8 10 0.357
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.27
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.36
2025-26 · Michigan Tech
+33.1% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

45%
NCAA D1
18%
NCAA D2/D3
22%
Age-Out / Club
15%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#17538
Forward overall
#733
Forward born in 2006

D1 Comparables

Thomas Ebbing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Michigan (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Aston-Reese
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average
NCAAe PPG
Nate Arentz
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Adam Johnson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.46 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Average
NCAAe PPG
Gage Torrel
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Shane Wheeler
St. Norbert · 2004-05
0.903 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jack Bartfield
Skidmore · 2022-23
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Marlon Gardner
Neumann · 2005-06
1.067 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.