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

Andrew Ciampichini Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-07-10 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
2007-08 — OJHL 46 10 9 19 0.413 0.1012 0.1080 0.2844 0.3035
2008-09 Collingwood Blues OJHL 49 31 27 58 1.184 0.2901 0.2947 0.8150 0.8278
2009-10 — OJHL 55 26 23 49 0.891 0.2184 0.2104 0.6134 0.5908
2010-11 — OJHL 46 14 30 44 0.957 0.2344 0.2149 0.6586 0.6037
■ 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
2014-15 Elmira D3 UCHC SR 27 6 12 18 0.667
2013-14 Elmira D3 UCHC JR 23 2 6 8 0.348
2012-13 Elmira D3 UCHC SO 22 6 4 10 0.455
2011-12 Elmira D3 UCHC FR 6 0 0 0 0.000

NCAAe Rankings

#16471
Forward overall
#649
Forward born in 1990
#558
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Justin Parizek
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG
T.J. Sarcona
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.06 PPG
→ Niagara (0.58 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lawson MacDougall
Hobart · 2015-16
0.750 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Corry
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2006-07
0.900 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Devin Cobbold
Wentworth · 2011-12
0.625 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.